PDA

View Full Version : Barrack Obama's Alleged 2004 Affair...


revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 09:48 AM
Okay, first things first. Obviously the source is a little dubious. But the question I have is, why is there no pop (read: mainstream media) media investigation of this? The Inquirer HAS broken a few legitimate affair stories over the years, and there's definitely some smoke here. Why doesn't a legit news at least take a look-see?

http://www.examiner.com/x-22153-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner~y2010m5d1-Obama-cheating-scandal-affair-alleged-with-Vera-Baker--Photos-of-Baker-vary-across-the-web?cid=exrss-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner

43Hitman
05-04-2010, 10:22 AM
Okay, first things first. Obviously the source is a little dubious. But the question I have is, why is there no pop (read: mainstream media) media investigation of this? The Inquirer HAS broken a few legitimate affair stories over the years, and there's definitely some smoke here. Why doesn't a legit news at least take a look-see?

http://www.examiner.com/x-22153-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner~y2010m5d1-Obama-cheating-scandal-affair-alleged-with-Vera-Baker--Photos-of-Baker-vary-across-the-web?cid=exrss-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/x-22153-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner%7Ey2010m5d1-Obama-cheating-scandal-affair-alleged-with-Vera-Baker--Photos-of-Baker-vary-across-the-web?cid=exrss-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner)

That's a rhetorical question right?

Vincent
05-04-2010, 10:38 AM
Why doesn't a legit news at least take a look-see?

First, if the Inquirer or any of the "supermarket tabloids" are suspect in their "reportage", then what we refer to as "the mainstream media" is no less suspect for the same reasons. The MSM are little more than political tabloids at this point. Any notion of "journalism" has long since been abdicated to what they were taught in the "hallowed halls" of "higher education" - "advocacy journalism".

Second, all media are businesses. They exist to make the almighty buck. Period. They "report" what they think will draw interest so that they can sell their product and, more importantly, advertising.

Their silence on a bho affair would seem to be in conflict with the "second". It would be a bonanza. This is where they really betray themselves as what they are. The first trumps the second in all things "obama". There are numerous things the MSM, including Fox, will not touch. One was any thought of linkage between Iraq and 9/11. Another is the whole WMD thing. bho's birth certificate? Howbout the "administration's" attention to the disaster in the Gulf? A bho affair? Anybody that would entertain such thoughts for even a second is a barking loon, despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary.

http://www.hopelessromantic.com/wackyheadpt/yellow_guy_crazy_hg_wht.gif

This is why men in black go straight for the "tabloids".

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 10:39 AM
I don't know...it seems to me that the honeymoon is over and even the most adoring news agencies are starting to take at least a slighter harder line with Barry. If you are the journalist to break this story, it smells like Pulitzer to me.

Not to mention the fact that it is a reporters journalistic responsibility to investigate the news...even if it turns out negatively for a guy they might have personally liked and elected....

Vincent
05-04-2010, 10:46 AM
If you are the journalist to break this story, it smells like Pulitzer to me.

It smells like a cement kamona to me.

Here's a "story" that would certainly gain "Bob Woodward" status - the bho political career. Start with Frank Marshall Davis in Chicago.

...journalistic responsibility ..

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

You're a funny guy!!

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 10:50 AM
It also occurs to me that perhaps there ARE some people on this, and they are just playing CYA until they have properly vetted their information and sources. Bush took a lot of flack and just ate it, but Barry seems the type to sue for libel...

Vincent
05-04-2010, 10:55 AM
...until they have properly vetted their information..

I'd like to see the, er, "relationship" between these two vetted.

http://babble.com/CS/blogs/politicalnanny/wrightobama.jpg

zulater
05-04-2010, 10:56 AM
Okay, first things first. Obviously the source is a little dubious. But the question I have is, why is there no pop (read: mainstream media) media investigation of this? The Inquirer HAS broken a few legitimate affair stories over the years, and there's definitely some smoke here. Why doesn't a legit news at least take a look-see?

http://www.examiner.com/x-22153-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner~y2010m5d1-Obama-cheating-scandal-affair-alleged-with-Vera-Baker--Photos-of-Baker-vary-across-the-web?cid=exrss-Cleveland-Pop-Culture-Examiner

I'm no fan of President Obama,but all the same I'm ok if the major media outlets are ignoring this rumor. Going through store checkout lines I've seen plenty of tabloids headlines that had G.W.B and Laura Bush getting a divorce or one of them hopelessly addicted to coke etc... and I didn't see the major news outlets running with those rumors either.

And regardless, even if it's true, it happened before he took office, and I don't concern myself with the goings on of consenting adults.

MACH1
05-04-2010, 10:58 AM
http://www.popwired.com/images/2009/02/obamagayscandal.jpg

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 11:09 AM
Believe it or not, there is a hierarchy of dubiousness...The Globe is at the very bottom, right next to the now-defunct World Weekly News.

The Inquirer is the original source of this story, which is several rungs up the ladder....but, considering some of the sources that are cited around here on a daily basis, I'd say the Inquirer is about par for the course. It's at least as credible as the Huffington Post....

WH
05-04-2010, 01:17 PM
He's a politician AND he cheated on his wife?!

Now I've seen it all!

Vincent
05-04-2010, 01:19 PM
He's a democrat AND he cheated on his wife?!

The donkeys don't own that territory.

WH
05-04-2010, 01:36 PM
The donkeys don't own that territory.

that's for sure.

If you're horny, and a successful powerful person, just divorce your wife or never get married.

xfl2001fan
05-04-2010, 03:57 PM
He's a politician AND he cheated on his wife?!

Now I've seen it all!

Thank you. This is such a non-issue IMO. I don't care what he did in 04. He's not fit to lead this country (regardless of how the majority voted...) but this has nothing to do with that. It's his inexperience. We all know he's a smooth talker (well, teleprompter reader)...and he is charismatic/charming. Even IF this was true, so what? It's not like we can impeach him over it.

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 04:09 PM
Thank you. This is such a non-issue IMO. I don't care what he did in 04. He's not fit to lead this country (regardless of how the majority voted...) but this has nothing to do with that. It's his inexperience. We all know he's a smooth talker (well, teleprompter reader)...and he is charismatic/charming. Even IF this was true, so what? It's not like we can impeach him over it.

It's dismissive and wrong to say that this doesn't matter. This guy is supposed to be about "Change" and "Hope".

How does that compute? This guy was supposed to be a breath of fresh air. He was supposed to change the paradigm. He was supposed to fix everything by offering a fresh, new perspective to all the World's problems. Christ, they gave this guy a Nobel based on that empty rhetoric!

He sat his own higher standard through that empty rhetoric and all the lies, and now those lies are turning out to be the lengths of rope he's going to end up strangling himself with.

Normally I don't think it matters. I don't give an eff about who these nits are banging. But this is different. HE raised the bar, and he deserves every ounce of extra scrutiny that it brings.

It's like Gary Hart in '84 (It was '84, right?) saying "I dare you to follow me! I'm clean and you won't find anything". He invited the scrutiny that ultimately undid his own candidacy....deservedly so

AllD
05-04-2010, 04:10 PM
I don't know...it seems to me that the honeymoon is over and even the most adoring news agencies are starting to take at least a slighter harder line with Barry. If you are the journalist to break this story, it smells like Pulitzer to me.

Not to mention the fact that it is a reporters journalistic responsibility to investigate the news...even if it turns out negatively for a guy they might have personally liked and elected....


Can the new insider who leaks details also be called, "Deepthroat"?

xfl2001fan
05-04-2010, 04:12 PM
It's dismissive and wrong to say that this doesn't matter. This guy is supposed to be about "Change" and "Hope".

How does that compute? This guy was supposed to be a breath of fresh air. He was supposed to change the paradigm. He was supposed to fix everything by offering a fresh, new perspective to all the World's problems. Christ, they gave this guy a Nobel based on that empty rhetoric!

He sat his own higher standard through that empty rhetoric and all the lies, and now those lies are turning out to be the lengths of rope he's going to end up strangling himself with.

Normally I don't think it matters. I don't give an eff about who these nits are banging. But this is different. HE raised the bar, and he deserves every ounce of extra scrutiny that it brings.

It's like Gary Hart in '84 (It was '84, right?) saying "I dare you to follow me! I'm clean and you won't find anything". He invited the scrutiny that ultimately undid his own candidacy....deservedly so


Maybe he's changed since 04 when this alleged affiar happened? :noidea: Ultimately, I would hope that we could come up with better news (you yourself have refuted this as being a credible source anyways.)

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 04:19 PM
One word (and we were literally INUNDATED with this during the campaign):

Transparency.

He came clean about the drugs. If this story has legs, why not admit this, too? The point is the same overriding one I've been making about this guy since day 1: If he's really about change and hope, then where is the REAL change and where is the REAL hope. Most of his better policy decisions have been recycled Bush policies. He has stolen half his policy positioning from McCain, and it's the same half he blasted McCain about during the campaign as being 100% wrong.

This is classic "Emperor with no clothes".

The OP is probably 90% simply being let's treat the goose and the gander the same.

stlrtruck
05-04-2010, 04:21 PM
It's dismissive and wrong to say that this doesn't matter. This guy is supposed to be about "Change" and "Hope".


Well he changed his "docking station" and hoped no one found out! :rofl: :toofunny:

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 04:26 PM
Well he changed his "docking station" and hoped no one found out! :rofl: :toofunny:

Brings up and interesting part of this story. How many "top campaign officials" from SUCCESSFUL Presidential campaigns simply quit and move on? The reward is usually a Cabinet spot or Ambassadorship, at least a spot on the WH staff. Nobody just "quits". That's BS.

And then there's this:

According to Federal Election Commission records, Baker was paid a hefty fee for her services as Finance Director for the Obama Senate campaign. But in fact, Clair Serdiuk was officially and repeatedly referred to as Obama's Finance Directors throughout the campaign.

So what did she actually do?

Like I said, there's smoke here...a lot of it....

WH
05-04-2010, 04:28 PM
Brings up and interesting part of this story. How many "top campaign officials" from SUCCESSFUL Presidential campaigns simply quit and move on? The reward is usually a Cabinet spot or Ambassadorship, at least a spot on the WH staff. Nobody just "quits". That's BS.

And then there's this:

According to Federal Election Commission records, Baker was paid a hefty fee for her services as Finance Director for the Obama Senate campaign. But in fact, Clair Serdiuk was officially and repeatedly referred to as Obama's Finance Directors throughout the campaign.

So what did she actually do?

Like I said, there's smoke here...a lot of it....

in weird twist...her daughter goes to school in Milledgeville, Georgia.

SMOKE i tell you!! SMOKE!!!

revefsreleets
05-04-2010, 04:37 PM
Obama is (supposedly) a Steelers fan.

Just how deep does this rabbit hole go?

Seriously, I just think it's interesting that the major media ignored this.

WH
05-04-2010, 04:40 PM
Obama is (supposedly) a Steelers fan.

Just how deep does this rabbit hole go?

Seriously, I just think it's interesting that the major media ignored this.
Would have been a nice test for BHO if the Browns would have won the superbowl. If he would have worn a Browns hat, I think Pittsburgh would have just up and invaded DC.

Vincent
05-04-2010, 05:23 PM
Obama is (supposedly) a Steelers fan.

Like he's a Chicago anything fan. Ask him to describe any player or team accomplishment of the last 76 years and you'll get the same "Uh.... well.... er.... I was... um... Hawaii... but... I like Oakland.".

bho is a marxist. He couldn't spell "sports" if it was on his teleprompter.

stillers4me
05-04-2010, 05:48 PM
Suspend him for six games and make him go into rehab. And Belichick gets 2 more draft picks.

SteelerEmpire
05-04-2010, 05:54 PM
Is this the same magazine that said BHO was an alien ?? ... lol...

Vincent
05-04-2010, 07:12 PM
Is this the same magazine that said BHO was an alien ?? ... lol...

He is. He's from Kenya.

The Patriot
05-04-2010, 07:21 PM
Obama is (supposedly) a Steelers fan.

Just how deep does this rabbit hole go?

Seriously, I just think it's interesting that the major media ignored this.

They would look bad if (in all likeliness) nothing came of this story. I'm sure they're tracking it. I know you think that the media is protecting Obama because there was such an obvious liberal bias during the election, but they're still out to make money. And no story sells like trouble in the white house.

Vincent
05-04-2010, 07:26 PM
They would look bad if (in all likeliness) nothing came of this story. I'm sure they're tracking it. I know you think that the media is protecting Obama because there was such an obvious liberal bias during the election, but they're still out to make money. And no story sells like trouble in the white house.

Interesting. So you're saying that in this case, sales trump ideology. Thats a clash if ever there was one - capitalism v liberal groupthink.

Need to pull up a chair for this one. :popcorn:

revefsreleets
05-05-2010, 11:05 AM
They would look bad if (in all likeliness) nothing came of this story. I'm sure they're tracking it. I know you think that the media is protecting Obama because there was such an obvious liberal bias during the election, but they're still out to make money. And no story sells like trouble in the white house.


I don't THINK there is liberal bias in the media, I KNOW there is liberal bias in the media. See: UCLA scholarly study proving as much.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

What I really think is that major news sources aren't going to risk a libel suit originating from POTUS unless they can find at least a few reliable sources, and it's going to be tough to do.

Dino 6 Rings
05-05-2010, 12:44 PM
Ok, I saw this and was not as interested once I found out it was from '04.

As long as he isn't sticking cigars into sweet spots in the Oval Office, I give him a pass on this one. Heck, I'm a Rudy G fan and he's had his affairs and married his mistress in fact. So, well, it happens, and if he banged some chick hanger on while campaigning or whatever, well then, he did and its in the past. I'm more interested in what's happening now and his policies that I feel are having a negative effect on our society and splitting this nation down racial and economic lines instead of uniting us the way we were promised.

I'm more concerned with the fact that the President of the United States used the tearm "tea baggers" when referring to Tea Party Protestors. That was Low Class. Almost as low as actually tea bagging an intern in the Oval Office. Not quite, but on that same level of dirty.

Don't remember any kind of slime and sexxxual crap coming out of the White House when we had Darth Cheney and his apprentice Darth Bush in charge of things. Sure, we went to war "over oil" or "over freedom" which ever side you are on you have your own idea about it, but still, it was nice to not have a sexual scandal involving our Sitting United States President that made "oralsexxx" the lead on the national news shows.

Anyway...I won't dig on this one, for now. Unless this broad shows up in the Oval Office on her knees tomorrow on camera giving the prez a smile and a coke, I don't care about it and hope it fades away.

Vincent
05-05-2010, 01:31 PM
I don't care about it and hope it fades away.

I don't care either. I'm wide open to anything that takes him down.

WH
05-05-2010, 01:39 PM
I don't care either. I'm wide open to anything that takes him down.

you a big Joe Biden fan?

Vincent
05-05-2010, 01:43 PM
you a big Joe Biden fan?

Joe doesn't need a "push". :chuckle:

WH
05-05-2010, 01:46 PM
Joe doesn't need a "push". :chuckle:

:noidea:

i don't get it....

i'm sorry.

Vincent
05-05-2010, 02:20 PM
:noidea:

i don't get it....

i'm sorry.

Joe, if left to his own devices, will implode on himself.

WH
05-05-2010, 03:01 PM
Joe, if left to his own devices, will implode on himself.

hahahaha, ok, i get it.

i'm thick some(most)times.

SteelersinCA
05-05-2010, 03:27 PM
I fail to see what impact this has on him being President. He had an affair, who cares? People only cared about Clinton because he lied under oath and he did it while President. This isn't even close. Maybe the people of Illinois should care, but I doubt it. Similarly I don't see how hope and change in government correlates to the man's personal life. I guess we don't have enough threads trying to dig up dirt on Obama.

revefsreleets
05-05-2010, 04:15 PM
I fail to see what impact this has on him being President. He had an affair, who cares? People only cared about Clinton because he lied under oath and he did it while President. This isn't even close. Maybe the people of Illinois should care, but I doubt it. Similarly I don't see how hope and change in government correlates to the man's personal life. I guess we don't have enough threads trying to dig up dirt on Obama.

Truly shocking to see the contrarian view from a playpen member.

Anyway, I stand behind my comments, and for several reasons. First off, we were promised a new era of transparency and trust, a new paradigm in government. This implicitly infers that Obama is trustworthy and pure in his motives, and is asking to be held to a higher standard. So, it's just a tad hypocritical to stand up on his soapbox and claim to be the voice of hope and change, yet fail to disclose an affair he had with his campaign finance director. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with holding this guys toes to the fire when he's caught being just another slimy politician who does all the things other slimy politicians do.

Which leads to my second point. I don't really give a shit how many women this guy sleeps with. I didn't care about Clinton, either. But a lot of people do. That's important. He won't be re-elected for sure if this story has legs and breaks.

Finally, how is posting this any different than posting the garbage reports off 1250 that Arians was 100% fired? Is THAT 100% FALSE rumor somehow more valuable because the people who posted it shared a certain position in their collected beliefs about Bruce Arians?

WH
05-05-2010, 04:28 PM
Which leads to my second point. I don't really give a shit how many women this guy sleeps with. I didn't care about Clinton, either. But a lot of people do. That's important. He won't be re-elected for sure if this story has legs and breaks.



Dude, there is enough hate for the guy already. he's not getting reelected.

Finally, how is posting this any different than posting the garbage reports off 1250 that Arians was 100% fired? Is THAT 100% FALSE rumor somehow more valuable because the people who posted it shared a certain position in their collected beliefs about Bruce Arians?

it isn't any different. who said it was?

revefsreleets
05-05-2010, 04:37 PM
I'm simply answering posts that infer it's ludicrous to even post this. Heavy, maybe even unfairly heavy, scrutiny is part and parcel with the job of POTUS.

SteelersinCA
05-05-2010, 06:54 PM
it isn't any different. who said it was?

No one, he just likes to hear himself talk/see himself post. :blah::blah::blah:

tony hipchest
05-05-2010, 10:57 PM
national inquirer? really? :toofunny: "look at me, look at meeeee!"

only old ladies, soap opera fanatics, and creepy single guys who raise 15+ cats read that supermarket tabloid garbage....

*flush*

(a bit of advice... chupacabra updates might be less embarrassing because atleast theyre funny and just as credible.)

revefsreleets
05-06-2010, 08:37 AM
national inquirer? really? :toofunny: "look at me, look at meeeee!"

only old ladies, soap opera fanatics, and creepy single guys who raise 15+ cats read that supermarket tabloid garbage....

*flush*

(a bit of advice... chupacabra updates might be less embarrassing because atleast theyre funny and just as credible.)

Uh-oh...the playpen brought out the third string.:rofl:


How is a tabloid mag less credible, then, oh, I don't know, say a single guy at one radio station? Or a twitter account?

Anyway, I'm just passing this information along. It's interesting, and as credible as 3/4's of the other trash posted on this board...plus I get a kick out of raising the ire of the braintrust members...