David Axelrod busted on lie about his father's Communist Party membership

[Wehrwolfen]

By Thomas Lifson
February 22, 2015

David Axelrod was a hugely consequential figure in the rise of Barack Obama, and he has been caught in a big lie. A former Chicago Tribune reporter, political consultant Axelrod latched onto Barack Obama as an ideal vehicle for a stratospheric political rise to power, and as his campaign “brain” accomplished that goal better than he could have hoped.

Axelrod had already known Obama a decade when he began working for him in 2002, as the backbencher in the Illinois State Senate mapped out his campaign for Senator in 2004. A seat in the United States Senate would position Obama for national power, but it was far from a given that Obama would win, until something rather miraculous happened. The GOP had an attractive and wealthy candidate in Jack Ryan, a man able to self-finance his campaign. But in a highly coincidental move, Axelrod’s old colleagues at the Chicago Tribune(http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-04...n18-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-0406180364jun18-story.html)) somehow persuaded a California court to open the confidential divorce records of Ryan, which contained salacious accusations of his wife, made as part of the divorce proceedings. As the Tribune itself anticipated, the disclosure was devastating, and Ryan withdrew and was replaced by a weak candidate, Alan Keyes, who went down to a big defeat, elevating Obama to the national stage.

Axelrod’s management of Obama’s presidential campaign is widely acknowledged to have been very skillful, if not brilliant. The selection of the vague, wide-open slogan “change” is credited to him, for example.

So David Axelrod can be acknowledged as one of the major forces helping Obama attain his position as POTUS. Now, why would his family background matter? After all, the sins of the father should not be the responsibility of the son, should they?

The problem is that Axelrod has been lying about it. He was, in fact a “red diaper baby,” raised by a Communist to achieve the goals of the Party. Charles C. Johnson,(http://gotnews.com/busted-we-have-ax...rce=feedburner (http://gotnews.com/busted-we-have-axelrods-fathers-communist-party-membership-obamalovesamerica/?utm_source=feedburner)) in an exclusive report, provides both the evidence of Axelrod Senior’s membership, and of Axelrod Junior’s lies:


Axelrod briefly mentions his father’s Communist views in his book but only in passing and in a section about how he got to visit the former Soviet Union.

(http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Fo.../dp/1594205876 (http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Forty-Years-Politics/dp/1594205876))


http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-02/194145_5_.png

But the problem is that documentary evidence, a CPUSA membership list for its 1936 election, lists Axelrod’s father.

http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-02/194146_5_.png


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...#ixzz3SVPrq9UG (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/david_axelrod_busted_on_lie_about_his_fathers_comm unist_party_membership.html#ixzz3SVPrq9UG)


So are we finding the lies of Progressive Marxist operatives greater than those of supposed lying commentators. I think not. But if birds of a feather flock together why no connections between CPUSA, Axelrod, Davis, Alinsky, Ayers and Obama? Conspiracy? No a cabal joined together with one goal. The destruction of America from within.

[Mister D]

Communism was very popular among Jews at that time.

[Common]

The americanthinker.com is the far right version of the dailykos. I dont read either

[Safety]

If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?

[Bob]

Communism was very popular among Jews at that time.

My Grandfather, whom I knew well, per my mother was also a registered communist during the depresson.

He was so thrilled with communism, he and grandma named their youngest son that died in Korea, fighting communists, Eugene V. Debbs (last name)

Grandpa voted for Democrats and i believe that is why my mom was also a Democrat. No republicans were in my family until by 1978-80 i became one. I became one by a lot of personal study. I did not change on a whim. It was a very rational decision when I voted for my first ever republican. Ronald Reagan. What is funny is when he ran for our state Governor, as a still rabid Democrat. I voted against the man.

I might be the rare person to vote two times against Reagan and 2 times for the man.
Reagan turned out to be this nations best all time president.

[Mac-7]

If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?


Libs seemed to think so when it was Rudi Giuliani on the hot seat.

[Safety]

Libs seemed to think so when it was Rudi Giuliani on the hot seat.

And I think the consensus was Rudy could choose his own path to head down. So this is a non-story then, right?

[Cigar]

If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?

I think its going to take a long time before they ever get over a Black Man kicking their ass, Twice, Back-2-Black :laugh:

[Redrose]

I think its going to take a long time before they ever get over a Black Man kicking their ass, Twice, Back-2-Black :laugh:


He's more cocoa colored, so would it be "Back-2-Cocoa?" The "dumb cowboy" won twice too. So what?

[Peter1469]

The americanthinker.com is the far right version of the dailykos. I dont read either

The Americanthinker actually has good stuff - just realize the slant. There are some good left leaning sites as well- by DailyKos is not one of them. They deliberately lie.

[Wehrwolfen]

If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?

According to the Bible, when you worship an ideology rather than God, he will visit the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.
See: Exodus 34:6-7 (http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Exodus%2034.6-7)

[PolWatch]

guess that puts Ted Cruz outta the running...his father was one of Castro's Bearded ones. Jindal was born & raised a Hindu...guess he's gone too. Things are looking thin just going back 1 generation.

[Cigar]

He's more cocoa colored, so would it be "Back-2-Cocoa?" The "dumb cowboy" won twice too. So what?


But Barack realy realy realy hurts you ... and that a poetic :grin:

We already know the Cowboy can do no wrong. :tongue:

That what

[Redrose]

After a quick Google search, I found out that Al Gore, Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVDavisGore599.html) when he was a Democratic U.S. Senator from Tennessee. Not only did he vote against it, he participated in a 74 day filibuster in an attempt to delay and weaken the legislation. A Democrat....against Civil Rights. Really, a Democrat not a Republican. Imagine that.

Yet the left still herald Al Gore, Jr., his son, for president and then elevated him to global warming royalty.

We are all influenced somewhat by our parents, some more than others. Judge them each individually.

[Common]

After a quick Google search, I found out that Al Gore, Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVDavisGore599.html) when he was a Democratic U.S. Senator from Tennessee. Not only did he vote against it, he participated in a 74 day filibuster in an attempt to delay and weaken the legislation. A Democrat....against Civil Rights. Really, a Democrat not a Republican. Imagine that.

Yet the left still herald Al Gore, Jr., his son, for president and then elevated him to global warming royalty.

We are all influenced somewhat by our parents, some more than others. Judge them each individually.

yep there were alot of democrat phonies that flipped politically when it became expedient from the south.

[Redrose]

But Barack realy realy realy hurts you ... and that a poetic :grin:

We already know the Cowboy can do no wrong. :tongue:

That what


On the contrary, it doesn't hurt me, I just feel it's not really accurate. But it does sound more dramatic if nothing else.

[gamewell45]

By Thomas Lifson
February 22, 2015

David Axelrod was a hugely consequential figure in the rise of Barack Obama, and he has been caught in a big lie. A former Chicago Tribune reporter, political consultant Axelrod latched onto Barack Obama as an ideal vehicle for a stratospheric political rise to power, and as his campaign “brain” accomplished that goal better than he could have hoped.

Axelrod had already known Obama a decade when he began working for him in 2002, as the backbencher in the Illinois State Senate mapped out his campaign for Senator in 2004. A seat in the United States Senate would position Obama for national power, but it was far from a given that Obama would win, until something rather miraculous happened. The GOP had an attractive and wealthy candidate in Jack Ryan, a man able to self-finance his campaign. But in a highly coincidental move, Axelrod’s old colleagues at the Chicago Tribune(http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-04...n18-story.html (http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-0406180364jun18-story.html)) somehow persuaded a California court to open the confidential divorce records of Ryan, which contained salacious accusations of his wife, made as part of the divorce proceedings. As the Tribune itself anticipated, the disclosure was devastating, and Ryan withdrew and was replaced by a weak candidate, Alan Keyes, who went down to a big defeat, elevating Obama to the national stage.

Axelrod’s management of Obama’s presidential campaign is widely acknowledged to have been very skillful, if not brilliant. The selection of the vague, wide-open slogan “change” is credited to him, for example.

So David Axelrod can be acknowledged as one of the major forces helping Obama attain his position as POTUS. Now, why would his family background matter? After all, the sins of the father should not be the responsibility of the son, should they?

The problem is that Axelrod has been lying about it. He was, in fact a “red diaper baby,” raised by a Communist to achieve the goals of the Party. Charles C. Johnson,(http://gotnews.com/busted-we-have-ax...rce=feedburner (http://gotnews.com/busted-we-have-axelrods-fathers-communist-party-membership-obamalovesamerica/?utm_source=feedburner)) in an exclusive report, provides both the evidence of Axelrod Senior’s membership, and of Axelrod Junior’s lies:


Axelrod briefly mentions his father’s Communist views in his book but only in passing and in a section about how he got to visit the former Soviet Union.

(http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Fo.../dp/1594205876 (http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Forty-Years-Politics/dp/1594205876))


http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-02/194145_5_.png

But the problem is that documentary evidence, a CPUSA membership list for its 1936 election, lists Axelrod’s father.

http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-02/194146_5_.png


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...#ixzz3SVPrq9UG (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/02/david_axelrod_busted_on_lie_about_his_fathers_comm unist_party_membership.html#ixzz3SVPrq9UG)


So are we finding the lies of Progressive Marxist operatives greater than those of supposed lying commentators. I think not. But if birds of a feather flock together why no connections between CPUSA, Axelrod, Davis, Alinsky, Ayers and Obama? Conspiracy? No a cabal joined together with one goal. The destruction of America from within.


When you say he got busted, was he arrested for membership in the communist party?? The article is very vague.

[gamewell45]

Communism was very popular among Jews at that time.

Ronald Reagan applied for membership in the communist party in 1938, but was rejected.


http://www.peoplesworld.org/the-real-ronald-reagan-on-his-100th-birthday/

[hanger4]

Ronald Reagan applied for membership in the communist party in 1938, but was rejected.


http://www.peoplesworld.org/the-real-ronald-reagan-on-his-100th-birthday/

The peoplesworld il rot your brain gamewell45



Peoplesworld.org is a daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.


http://www.peoplesworld.org/about-us



The Daily Worker was a newspaper published in New York City by the Communist Party USA,


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Worker

[gamewell45]

The peoplesworld il rot your brain @gamewell45 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=276)




http://www.peoplesworld.org/about-us




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Worker

Are you denying that Ronald Reagan applied for membership in the communist party. If it came from Fox News would it make a difference??

If it's coming from the Daily Worker, isn't that even more proof?

[hanger4]

Are you denying that Ronald Reagan applied for membership in the communist party. If it came from Fox News would it make a difference??

If it's coming from the Daily Worker, isn't that even more proof?

Don't care if RR attempted to join the CP, he sure as hell didn't govern

that way. I'm sayin' the crap you read on that site will rot your brain.

[Redrose]

Don't care if RR attempted to join the CR, he sure as hell didn't govern

that way. I'm sayin' the crap you read on that site will rot your brain.


That is exactly right. RR governed well. Guiliani governed well. Jindal governs well. Obama is not governing well.

[hanger4]

BTW gamewell45 that "Reagan tried to join the Communist Party in 1938"

crap was in the comment section of your link. Reckon ya can do a little

better sourcing your statements than somebody saying it's so in a chat-room ??

[gamewell45]

BTW @gamewell45 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=276) that "Reagan tried to join the Communist Party in 1938"

crap was in the comment section of your link. Reckon ya can do a little

better sourcing your statements than somebody saying it's so in a chat-room ??

No, but thank you for asking.

[Bob]

guess that puts Ted Cruz outta the running...his father was one of Castro's Bearded ones. Jindal was born & raised a Hindu...guess he's gone too. Things are looking thin just going back 1 generation.

See how quick you were able to run down both Cruz and Jindal?

We all on the republican side are well aware that Democrats have plenty more dirty tricks where those came from.

[Bob]

That is exactly right. RR governed well. Guiliani governed well. Jindal governs well. Obama is not governing well.

So, my Reagan comments caught fire. LOL Reagan was the exceptional president. Bar no president, he was the very best of all of them.

Why not Washington? He owned over 100 slaves and was filthy rich. Not that i mind wealth, but slaves is different. Same with Jefferson. The other 10 presidents that owned slaves are not all that well thought of near the very top.

If Reagan actually tried to join the communists, is it any wonder? Reagan was a devoted Democrat. He had to see the evil of communism to fight it.

[hanger4]

No, but thank you for asking.

That's to bad gamewell45 anybody Left Center or Right that reads

this exchange between you and I will always question your credibility.

BTW I suggest you read up on Howard Fast, might help ya out on this

*Reagan tried to join the Communist Party in 1938* silliness your trying

to push as the truth.

[Bob]

After a quick Google search, I found out that Al Gore, Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVDavisGore599.html) when he was a Democratic U.S. Senator from Tennessee. Not only did he vote against it, he participated in a 74 day filibuster in an attempt to delay and weaken the legislation. A Democrat....against Civil Rights. Really, a Democrat not a Republican. Imagine that.
Yet the left still herald Al Gore, Jr., his son, for president and then elevated him to global warming royalty.

We are all influenced somewhat by our parents, some more than others. Judge them each individually.

If you go to the library of congress (it is on the WWW so google it) and inquire of the civil rights act, you can get a blow by blow report. It proves that Democrats fought very hard to stop that law.

What is wild is Democrats want the full credit for that law. Imagine that. One more thing they lie about.

Johnson was furious with Democrats.

[Bob]

yep there were alot of democrat phonies that flipped politically when it became expedient from the south.

One did. But he had a history of fighting the republicans whom fought for the civil rights law.

You did not expect to read real experts on that law I am betting.

I used to love debunking the claim that democrats that backed slavery in effect changed to republicans. I found some jerk who said that and proved he simply not only was wrong, but did not know what he was talking about.

[gamewell45]

That's to bad @gamewell45 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=276) anybody Left Center or Right that reads

this exchange between you and I will always question your credibility.

BTW I suggest you read up on Howard Fast, might help ya out on this

*Reagan tried to join the Communist Party in 1938* silliness your trying

to push as the truth.

Are you denying that Reagan attempted to join the communist party in 1938? Either its true or not true; I presented evidence that says he tried to join. You just don't like the source.

Because you don't believe what was presented to you doesn't mean it's "silliness" as you try to make it. People have an unfettered right to question my or your credibility; the question is, which one of us is correct.

[Redrose]

So, my Reagan comments caught fire. LOL Reagan was the exceptional president. Bar no president, he was the very best of all of them.

Why not Washington? He owned over 100 slaves and was filthy rich. Not that i mind wealth, but slaves is different. Same with Jefferson. The other 10 presidents that owned slaves are not all that well thought of near the very top.

If Reagan actually tried to join the communists, is it any wonder? Reagan was a devoted Democrat. He had to see the evil of communism to fight it.


True. RR, as a young voter, was an FDR Democrat then changed to a Conservative Republican as he matured and was a staunch fighter against Communism.

My idiot college professor sister joined the Communist Party in her freshman year at Brooklyn College. She didn't realize what she was joining. Came back to haunt her when she was going through the scrutiny for her PhD. She just said it was the "ignorance of youth".

Obama regardless what he may or may not have been exposed to as a youth, has chosen as an adult, a mature adult, to surround himself with "advisors" who profess to adhere to Communist tenets.

That concerns me.

[Mac-7]

True. RR, as a young voter, was an FDR Democrat then changed to a Conservative Republican as he matured and was a staunch fighter against Communism.

My idiot college professor sister joined the Communist Party in her freshman year at Brooklyn College. She didn't realize what she was joining. Came back to haunt her when she was going through the scrutiny for her PhD. She just said it was the "ignorance of youth".

Obama regardless what he may or may not have been exposed to as a youth, has chosen as an adult, a mature adult, to surround himself with "advisors" who profess to adhere to Communist tenets.

That concerns me.

Obumer apologists insist that he is a patriot.

But with lefties their patriotism is always conditional.

When America adopts policies they like the love flows freely.

but when America does not then the hate of lefties rears its ugly head.

Obumer grew up being mentored by lefties who most certainly did not like US policy during his youth.

And he is the product of that leftwing hate.

[Peter1469]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_E5tv7Vm0fsY/TLzFjB74OvI/AAAAAAAAATU/LpgJ1s6a0b4/s1600/broken-record-765056.jpg

[PolWatch]

See how quick you were able to run down both Cruz and Jindal?

We all on the republican side are well aware that Democrats have plenty more dirty tricks where those came from.

dirty tricks? does that include picking a remark and not including what the statement was in response to? That seems to be rather dishonest to me...

'If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?
According to the Bible, when you worship an ideology rather than God, he will visit the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.
See: Exodus 34:6-7 (http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Exodus 34.6-7)'

[Mr. P]

dirty tricks? does that include picking a remark and not including what the statement was in response to? That seems to be rather dishonest to me...

'If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?
According to the Bible, when you worship an ideology rather than God, he will visit the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.
See: Exodus 34:6-7 (http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Exodus 34.6-7)'

I will ask you about using the Bible as a source of arguing when we are over on one of the numerous homosexual threads. Please remind me.

[Mac-7]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_E5tv7Vm0fsY/TLzFjB74OvI/AAAAAAAAATU/LpgJ1s6a0b4/s1600/broken-record-765056.jpg

Another speechless lib trying to communicate the only way he can.

[PolWatch]

I will ask you about using the Bible as a source of arguing when we are over on one of the numerous homosexual threads. Please remind me.

you would need to ask the person who posted the Bible verse and created the thread....

[hanger4]

Are you denying that Reagan attempted to join the communist party in 1938? Either its true or not true; I presented evidence that says he tried to join. You just don't like the source.

Because you don't believe what was presented to you doesn't mean it's "silliness" as you try to make it. People have an unfettered right to question my or your credibility; the question is, which one of us is correct.

Yes I'm denying it gamewell45 Your source was a post made

in the comment section of a link from a 2011 story. Not to mention

this here link of yours is CPUSA trash.

[gamewell45]

Yes I'm denying it @gamewell45 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=276) Your source was a post made

in the comment section of a link from a 2011 story. Not to mention

this here link of yours is CPUSA trash.

Ok, in that case, both you and I will have to agree to disagree on this thread.

[silvereyes]

Another speechless lib trying to communicate the only way he can.

Hes not lib. Not at all.

[Safety]

Hes not lib. Not at all.

There's only two non-libs in existence in Mac's world, him and David Duke.

[hanger4]

Ok, in that case, both you and I will have to agree to disagree on this thread.

There is no "agree to disagree" you made a statement that can't be

validated. Hell the poster at your link didn't even corroborate the statement.

All you're doing is repeating a rumor that's been debunked many, many

years ago.


The latest specimen of this type is that Ronald Reagan in 1938 attempted to join the Communist Party but was rejected. This rumor, first aired in Edmund Morris' admittedly part fictionalized account of the president, now matter-of-factly appearing in John Patrick Diggins' biography of Reagan.
................
But the problem with the Reagan story is that it is attributable to only one source, Party member Howard Fast. Even sympathizers with Fast stated the he was always making up stories about famous figures trying to join the Party.

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=26626


Howard Fast; But his attempts to impress the Left never stopped. In later years, he tried to give them the ultimate weapon against anti-communism by claiming that Ronald Reagan had tried to join the Party in 1938 but was rejected for being “too stupid.” Such was Fast’s low reputation among Party members that they took this story to be nonsense.

http://paintingtheculturered.com/the-fast-talking-howard-fast/

[Bob]

dirty tricks? does that include picking a remark and not including what the statement was in response to? That seems to be rather dishonest to me...

'If this was a sin, do the sins of the father fall on the son?
According to the Bible, when you worship an ideology rather than God, he will visit the sins of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation.
See: Exodus 34:6-7 (http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Exodus 34.6-7)'

Not at all. Since your statements were clearly made and remain to be read, I did nothing wrong. As to the Bible, I don't quote the book for a variety of reasons. It might make me seem dishonest.

[Mac-7]

Hes not lib. Not at all.

Liberal:

Wants bigger government so that Uncle Obama can tax the rich and wipe every lazy, personally irresponsible nose in America.

Libertine:

Pro homosexual for sure.

and probably the first to support pedophiles, beastiality and every other sexual perversion libs can think of.

Libertarian:

Isolationist, anti Republican, unConservative.

Lib, lib, and lib.

[silvereyes]

There's only two non-libs in existence in Mac's world, him and David Duke.
Well, butter my butt and call me biscuit. Duke taint a lib? Whuuuut? There goes my party theme.

[Mac-7]

There's only two non-libs in existence in Mac's world, him and David Duke.

Brown noser.

[silvereyes]

Liberal:

Wants bigger government so that Uncle Obama can tax the rich and wipe every lazy, personally irresponsible nose in America.

Libertine:

Pro homosexual for sure.

and probably the first to support pedophiles, beastiality and every other sexual perversion libs can think of.

Libertarian:

Isolationist, anti Republican, unConservative.

Lib, lib, and lib.
Huge...huge... yawn.

[Cigar]

:laugh:

[Bob]

True. RR, as a young voter, was an FDR Democrat then changed to a Conservative Republican as he matured and was a staunch fighter against Communism.

My idiot college professor sister joined the Communist Party in her freshman year at Brooklyn College. She didn't realize what she was joining. Came back to haunt her when she was going through the scrutiny for her PhD. She just said it was the "ignorance of youth".

Obama regardless what he may or may not have been exposed to as a youth, has chosen as an adult, a mature adult, to surround himself with "advisors" who profess to adhere to Communist tenets.

That concerns me.

Obama is much closer to being a communist than Reagan ever was.

Reagan commented about Communism.

"Communism is neither an economic nor a political system, but a form of insanity, an aberration." (pp 4; Reagan in his own hand)

http://www.amazon.com/Reagan-His-Own-Hand-Revolutionary/dp/0743219384

[PolWatch]

Not at all. Since your statements were clearly made and remain to be read, I did nothing wrong. As to the Bible, I don't quote the book for a variety of reasons. It might make me seem dishonest.

Bob...you really need to read the threads before you start this sort of discussion. If you don't understand what my post was in response to....don't comment.

[PolWatch]

Brown noser.

Do not call members names

[Common]

Liberal:

Wants bigger government so that Uncle Obama can tax the rich and wipe every lazy, personally irresponsible nose in America.

Libertine:

Pro homosexual for sure.

and probably the first to support pedophiles, beastiality and every other sexual perversion libs can think of.

Libertarian:

Isolationist, anti Republican, unConservative.

Lib, lib, and lib.

You have issues and as del would appropriately ask...Tissue?

[Cigar]

There's only two non-libs in existence in Mac's world, him and David Duke.

... and at least one of his Palms

[Bob]

Bob...you really need to read the threads before you start this sort of discussion. If you don't understand what my post was in response to....don't comment.

I should have told you that. Sorry I explained.

[silvereyes]

Obama is much closer to being a communist than Reagan ever was.

Reagan commented about Communism.

"Communism is neither an economic nor a political system, but a form of insanity, an aberration." (pp 4; Reagan in his own hand)

http://www.amazon.com/Reagan-His-Own-Hand-Revolutionary/dp/0743219384
I wonder how many idealogoies yall will attach (& fail) to obama?

[Bob]

I wonder how many idealogoies yall will attach (& fail) to obama?

Look at Keystone pipeline. He has no true reason to block it other than trying to act like he believes he is the king. Even with the arguments over illegal immigration and security for the USA, he operates as if he is king.

Communism had a tragic side. It put a country into the control of one person for the most part. I happen to recall Stalin and how he ran the Soviet Union.

Sad to see Obama trying the same thing.

[texan]

(http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Fo.../dp/1594205876 (http://www.amazon.com/Believer-My-Forty-Years-Politics/dp/1594205876))


http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-02/194145_5_.png


Yep busted, I saw the interview he did on this and obviously didn't do his homework. I am sure this had no affect on Obama's upbringing tho.
Mike Huckabee is correct?

[silvereyes]

Look at Keystone pipeline. He has no true reason to block it other than trying to act like he believes he is the king. Even with the arguments over illegal immigration and security for the USA, he operates as if he is king.

Communism had a tragic side. It put a country into the control of one person for the most part. I happen to recall Stalin and how he ran the Soviet Union.

Sad to see Obama trying the same thing.
Two words: tar sands.

[Bob]

Two words: tar sands.

The sand is removed in Canada. The bitumen is to be taken by pipes to be refined. Refining corrects all problems.

See, by Obama playing King, he has the tar sands coming by rail. And being refined.

[silvereyes]

And what about Nebraska residents who dont want to cave to imminent domain and dont want to give up their land and livelihood?

[Peter1469]

:shocked:
Liberal:

Wants bigger government so that Uncle Obama can tax the rich and wipe every lazy, personally irresponsible nose in America.

Libertine:

Pro homosexual for sure.

and probably the first to support pedophiles, beastiality and every other sexual perversion libs can think of.

Libertarian:

Isolationist, anti Republican, unConservative.

Lib, lib, and lib.

[Bob]

And what about Nebraska residents who dont want to cave to imminent domain and dont want to give up their land and livelihood?

That never happens. Where have you seen oil pipes run people off?

4.6 million miles of them and so far I see no people removed from home or land.

The way it works in Nebraska is the community uses local laws and demands the owners be paid in full a fair value. It is in the constitution. Has to be done correctly.

[silvereyes]

Then why are the fine folk in Nebraska against it?

[Wehrwolfen]

I think its going to take a long time before they ever get over a Black Man kicking their ass, Twice, Back-2-Black :laugh:

I don't think so. Ben Carson or Condi Rice seem to look very good to me on the Republican ticket. I'd vote for either of them in a New York minute. But thanks for playing the race card again....

[hanger4]

And what about Nebraska residents who dont want to cave to imminent domain and dont want to give up their land and livelihood?


Nobody's giving up their land or livelihood, it's an easement.





Then why are the fine folk in Nebraska against it?


They're not it's only around 10-12% of the land owners that don't want

to enter into an easement agreement.

[Safety]

Nobodys giving up their land of livelihood, it's an easement.







They're not it's only around 10-12% of the land owners that don't want

to enter into an easement agreement.

I'm just saying, if I owned land in Kansas and the government came to me with an "easement agreement", I would refuse also.

[hanger4]

I'm just saying, if I owned land in Kansas and the government came to me with an "easement agreement", I would refuse also.

Well it's not the government purchasing the easement,

but I understand your meaning.