Investigation reveals numerous bogus claims on Obama resume

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10120
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Packing my stuff and moving to Denver like you should be doing

PostTue Apr 06, 2010 3:54 pm » by Savwafair2012

In what is being called 'the biggest hustle in human history,' a special investigation has discovered numerous bogus claims on Barack Obama's resume, including the outright lie that he was a 'Constitutional scholar and professor.'

The claim turns out to be false.

As investigators delve further into the background of Barack Obama, a disturbing picture is emerging of a man who is not who he claims to be. The information the public has been told concerning Obama is turning out to be false--fabrications and inventions of a man and an unseen force behind him that had clear ulterior motives for seeking the highest office in the land.

According to a special report issued by 'the Blogging Professor,' the Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama. The report states that Obama was unqualified, that he was never a 'constitutional professor and scholar,' and that he never served as editor of the Harvard Law Review while a student at the school.

The real truth is that Barack Obama was merely an 'instructor' at Chicago Law School, not a professor. Commonly, instructors are non-tenure-track teachers hired by colleges and universities to teach certain courses for a salary that is well below that of Associate Professors or full Professors.

In the hierarchy of higher education, the status of instructors is below that of associate professors and professors because they lack the credentials.

In fact, it can be safely concluded that the claims of Barack Obama concerning his educational credentials and work history in higher education are a complete sham. The President of the United States is a complete fraud.

According to Doug Ross:

I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement).
Thus, the question arises, was the claim that Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review a 'put-up job' as well, allowing the student to claim he held this prestigious position without having the qualifications or meeting the requirements of holding that position? And why?


Consider this: 1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that he "fibbed" on his bar application.

2. Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993.

3. So, we have the President and First Lady - who don't actually have licenses to practice law. Facts.

4. A senior lecturer is one thing. A fully ranked law professor is another. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, "Obama did NOT 'hold the title' of a University of Chicago law school professor". Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago.

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school, but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.
These are highly disturbing facts, verified facts from the people who know at the Chicago Law School.

There is more from Ross, however:

6. "He did not hold the title of professor of law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.

7. The former Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution recently during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

8. The B-Cast posted the video.

9. In the State of the Union Address, President Obama said: "We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in ourConstitution: the notion that we are all created equal."

10. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?

When you are a phony it's hard to keep facts straight.

Obama has made sure that all of his records are sealed tight. And apart from the courageous souls at the various educational institutions who dared to speak the truth, the schools Obama claimed to attend unanimously refuse to release transcripts, records, or other bits of evidence concerning Obama's presence in their institutions. ... ama-resume
Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, .

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10120
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Packing my stuff and moving to Denver like you should be doing

PostTue Apr 06, 2010 4:03 pm » by Savwafair2012

Image ... house.html

White House press corps say's they are granted special access to the President if they float positive stories about him

The White House is working hard to secure deals that yield fluffy, feel good commentary about the Obama White House. One American White House reporter used colorful terms to describe the arrangement. The reporter said, "They want 'blow jobs' first [in the press sense]. Then you have to be on good behavior for a bit or be willing to deal, and then you get access."

"Axe" and "Gibbs" know who needs access to get their books pushed forward.

They know who will pay for play -- and are taking notes on who has been naughty and nice in their reporting.

The rest is here. ... nications/
Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, .

Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 1:25 am

PostTue Apr 06, 2010 4:32 pm » by Govtslave

Don't hold your breath waiting for action to be taken. One need only compare the U.S. presidents of the last 70 years to those that preceded them to realize that America is being had.

User avatar
Posts: 1216
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:15 am

PostTue Apr 06, 2010 6:10 pm » by Chronicnerd

Here is some advice for the political minded folks here:

We all understand that America is a great place. If it wasn't a great place, then why would we be the only Country with the highest demand for citizenship? Albeit, this demand has drastically dropped in the past year+, however for the most part... people sneak into the US, try to marry into US Citizenship, and many simply try getting their foot in the door with a green card.

Why is this important?

If you are an American and you are reading this, then there is a very simple and civil way to handle this:

Come November be *very* careful who you vote for...and if you are a "spot" voter (i.e. one who 'sometimes' votes for your senator(s), congressmen, and governor)...then now is the time to become actively involved.

Does this mean you have to volunteer? Nope... just pay attention, ask questions, do your own research, and make a decision based on what *you* believe in and vote for who *you* think will represent *your* desires/wishes regarding "change" as well as "fixing the mess that the past several administrations have left in their wake".

Look, the whole debate on whether or not Obama is "legit" or not is a mute point right now. He has the support by the Democratic party who holds the house and the senate, and as such it doesn't matter if you have a family album book of him growing up in Kenya (not saying he did...but making a point) will be white washed, turned upside down, and spun by the politically biased/government influenced media.

Take the time you would spend researching all of this and talking about all of this and write down what kind of change you would like to see on a local (city), state, and federal level. Based on this "list", you then look at the candidates and see if a candidate matches what you are looking for...and then vote for *that* candidate.

In many states, you are going to have to discern from *noise* and from *real* candidates as well as always have a "runner up" in the event the candidate you picked isn't getting the traction you were hoping. Basically, you will end up with two who probably is *sponsored* by your "publicly labeled" party in question (i.e. Democrat or Republican)...and one who probably is running as an independent. Typically if they are "true blue" democrat or republican and *not* selected, they will step down. So, make sure you have your bases covered.

Next step is to *VOTE*...

All we need is the majority of both the house and the senate to be filled with people who love America, want to actually *fix* the issues at hand and not slap some goofy massive government program over it, and who will seek to create a level of transparency that is wanted, needed, and quite frankly what I personally believe is the right of "The People".

Once you have a house and senate that is not going to "go along with the flow because of personal ideologies and gain", all of this kind of stuff will naturally come out into the open because both the house and senate won't stand for B.S. like this...if in fact that it turns out to be true.

You have to be careful getting caught up in what I call "wheel spinning". They would like nothing more in the world for everyone to focus on "seemingly crazy" concepts as opposed to sticking to "facts" and "educating" yourself and those around you with "conservative"(not the party/political concept but the moderate and proven concept) facts as to why this administration needs a face lift immediately and prior to the next presidential election. If you were debating with someone why they shouldn't vote for Obama next election and started spewing things like: "He isn't even an American, he was never a professor, he was lazy, and he was the dumbest of the crew"... well... seeing as it took what... almost a year and a half to get this information out... I don't think there is just this "fountain" of what people might call "credible" information regarding this. Lot's of speculation...but hard evidence and agreement amongst the "peers" (i.e. house and senate) of said information/evidence... not gonna happen right now. Do I say that this information is real? I don't know... but I do know *something* is fishy because there is too much "smoke and mirrors" happening regarding Obama's past to not have one or two skeletons fall out of the closet.

This is why we have this voting period mid-term...if you end up with a "run away" administration, you can simply vote out the members of the house and senate that are allowing this activity and replace them with members who will "pull back on the reigns" and correct the issues created during the first two years of the term.

Do this in a civil, educated, and peaceful way...while it is impossible to state that it is a fact that the progressive minded left wing members are "wanting" the right wing minded folks to "freak out" and "cause panic/unrest" this point with all that is happening (i.e. the march in front of the upset Tea Party members during the day of the Health Care "vote") it appears they are inviting anyone and everyone to create unrest and disruption. This is a one way ticket to civil unrest, martial law, and things that personally I would love to avoid.

Vote this year... do it in a smart way...educate yourself...your neighbors...and anyone interested in not force your ideologies upon people, but rather debate them and learn why someone might have a different point of view. The great thing about America is that you CAN have your own political view even if it is whacked out and the minority of what the majority believe...the fact that you CAN do this and you CAN express this is VERY important to maintain. Respect others' opinions and debate with a calm and inquisitive mind. Trying to "covert", "change one's mind", "discount", "belittle", and any other negative inducing concept as opposed to "listen", "understand", and "acknowledge" others' views is the first step.

Vote for the right kind of people (only your own personal moral compass can do this)...
Strive to understand those who's ideas oppose your own, you might find that your ideologies aren't as flawless as you thought as well you might find an insight as to what miss-information the others might have...thus making the next debate that much easier to walk through.

Either case, all of this nonsense will come out within the next two years as long as we have a HOUSE and SENATE that:

1.) Believes in the *original* foundation of the constitution
2.) Believes in the free market system
3.) Has a history of being Honest
4.) Believes in most/many of your moral ideologies

The rest will fall like a house of cards...because that is all that it is right now...a stacked deck that is being used to build a barrier between the administration and the majority of the American people. The *minute* that deck becomes more equalized and hopefully biased more towards the idea of freedom, constitutional rights, and transparency to the degree in which it does not harm national security... the "barrier" created will simply vanish and all of the lies (if any) will all of the sudden become readily available and open for all to see...

And then...and only then...will all of this mess get cleaned up...

Until then...educate yourself, others, and vote!

Master Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 10120
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:10 pm
Location: Packing my stuff and moving to Denver like you should be doing

PostTue Apr 06, 2010 9:39 pm » by Savwafair2012


:clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper: :clapper:
Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, .

  • Related topics
    Last post