OMG - I feel so bad asking this..... [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

View Full Version : OMG - I feel so bad asking this.....

jillian

01-26-2008, 02:20 PM

Whatever happened to the Youtube guy making claims about Obama in the Limo?

Do we know if it's true? Is it getting any mainstream coverage?

Agent CSL

01-26-2008, 02:23 PM

Haven't heard anything come about from it. The guy was supposedly on radio with Rense, but that's the last I heard.

Sauron

01-26-2008, 02:27 PM

fedup100

01-26-2008, 02:29 PM

Go to rense archives and hear the interview. I found it very believable. It has been buried. Obama DOES have 1 supporter and it IS a billionaire who is buying his way into the White House.

Gadsden Flag

01-26-2008, 03:41 PM

It is so ridiculous. I am pretty dissappointed that so many people seem to believe it.

devil21

01-26-2008, 05:11 PM

It is so ridiculous. I am pretty dissappointed that so many people seem to believe it.

I wouldnt call the guy a liar since you can't prove it didn't happen. Only he and Obama know whether it's true or not. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Anyway, I havent heard anything about it. The YT video has 100K hits though...

jillian

01-26-2008, 05:27 PM

familydog

01-26-2008, 05:34 PM

I wouldnt call the guy a liar since you can't prove it didn't happen. Only he and Obama know whether it's true or not. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Anyway, I havent heard anything about it. The YT video has 100K hits though...

The point is that so many people believe it without it being confirmed. It's hypocritical for a lot of people here, but whatever.

moose

01-26-2008, 07:33 PM

I wouldnt call the guy a liar since you can't prove it didn't happen. Only he and Obama know whether it's true or not. Truth is often stranger than fiction. Anyway, I havent heard anything about it. The YT video has 100K hits though...

Instead let’s believe a guy who made a youtube account one week ago and uploaded a video make ridiculous claims that haven't been picked up by any major news network. The burden of proof is on Larry Sinclair since he is making the accusation. These techniques were used by the Clintons in the 1990s, perfected by Karl Rove in the 2000 election, and were used recently against Ron Paul to paint him as a “racist”.

Ex Post Facto

01-26-2008, 08:37 PM

Instead let’s believe a guy who made a youtube account one week ago and uploaded a video make ridiculous claims that haven't been picked up by any major news network. The burden of proof is on Larry Sinclair since he is making the accusation. These techniques were used by the Clintons in the 1990s, perfected by Karl Rove in the 2000 election, and were used recently against Ron Paul to paint him as a “racist”.

If this is a Clinton ploy it would be to the media already. Remember the senator and the bathroom incident, the media ate that up. This is a huge allegation they are ignoring.

I personally don't care if he did something in the back of a limo or not. Thats non of my business. However, I smell foul when the media will report something like this on other people in a heart beat, and not on Obama.

RustyBrewster

01-26-2008, 08:49 PM

Tell everyone about it if they ever mention Obama. Tell them it's been confirmed by his own limo driver that he gives bjs to his limo driver. Tell them he broke the story on youtube. Tell them everyone believes it and blacks won't vote for a gay man.

Hrmm.. Would Ron Paul approve of advocating the use of this kind of tactless, deceitful, malicious, unproven, unprovable, most likely made up, propaganda?

It's one thing to say, Hey someone said this happened, it's on youtube.

It's entirely different to propose it as a generally accepted fact and that it did happen. Advocating this kind of slander makes you look like nothing more than a jackass.

Most people would see through a claim like this that appears to be so far-fetched and off base. They would then assume that everything you have to say is out there. That you're political beliefs are off-base. That Ron Paul supporters are a wacko. And I'd be nuts to believe this crap and support Ron Paul.

Spreading stuff like this in any way other than as a joke because it's funny and being certain people know you are doing it in that matter will do nothing to help Ron Paul.

werdd

01-26-2008, 10:13 PM

i think his story is definately being suppressed, it deserves full media scrutiny and possible investigation. I dont care what any of you say.

devil21

01-27-2008, 05:19 PM

Instead let’s believe a guy who made a youtube account one week ago and uploaded a video make ridiculous claims that haven't been picked up by any major news network. The burden of proof is on Larry Sinclair since he is making the accusation. These techniques were used by the Clintons in the 1990s, perfected by Karl Rove in the 2000 election, and were used recently against Ron Paul to paint him as a “racist”.

I dont think that's what I said. I said that no one should label him a liar or a truthteller because we don't know. What's so hard about waiting until (if?) the issue is hashed out? I also know that many politicians are slimeballs so I wouldnt put some halo over Obama's head too quick. What if someone came out and posted the same video about Larry Craig before the airport incident? Same thing.

Heracles

01-27-2008, 05:32 PM

Tell everyone about it if they ever mention Obama. Tell them it's been confirmed by his own limo driver that he gives bjs to his limo driver. Tell them he broke the story on youtube. Tell them everyone believes it and blacks won't vote for a gay man.

I'm not telling anyone anything unless it's true. This rumor is completely new to me.

Can we verify that this man was indeed his limo driver? Since Obama opposes gay marriage it would definitely be a legitimate issue to bring up, but we need to conduct ourselves with integrity and avoid Rovian tactics.

If it's true, spread the word, but you better be able to back it up with verifiable data, or you're going to make all of us look like dirtbags.

thuja

01-27-2008, 05:35 PM

it seems that, at the same time, the things clinton does should be mentioned as well. those stories are awful, and no one would want such leaders. only RP has a clean life.

jillian

01-27-2008, 05:39 PM

I'm not telling anyone anything unless it's true. This rumor is completely new to me.

Can we verify that this man was indeed his limo driver? Since Obama opposes gay marriage it would definitely be a legitimate issue to bring up, but we need to conduct ourselves with integrity and avoid Rovian tactics.

If it's true, spread the word, but you better be able to back it up with verifiable data, or you're going to make all of us look like dirtbags.

are you sure about that?:confused:

jillian

01-27-2008, 05:43 PM

I can't tell where the guy stands on anything! In one sentence it says he opposes and then there's a "but" and he mutters something else about "balance"....

Barack Obama and Gay Marriage/ Civil Unions: Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996.

He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.

"Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society."
Sources: Chicago Daily Tribune, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

Nailhead

01-27-2008, 05:57 PM

LMAO check this video out...jokester immitation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_wRb8J_bjM

devil21

01-27-2008, 10:46 PM

LMAO check this video out...jokester immitation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_wRb8J_bjM

Hahahaha :eek: thats funny

Sauron

01-27-2008, 11:05 PM

Like there's really any way to prove it. Unless, of course, DNA evidence is uncovered.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 02:08 PM

I think it is terrible that bloggers are pointing to Ron Paul's campaign as being the "source" of the Larry Sinclair story. Obviously, a "dirty trick" of this kind is just not Ron Paul's style (although it may be Hillary's style.) The only common thread of interest in Ron Paul supporters and Larry Sinclair is the demand for truth from our elected representatives, including the President.

This is why Larry Sinclair's claims are important. It goes toward Barack Obama's credibility as a Presidential candidate if he is lying about past drug use and if he has been unfaithful to his family. We don't need another liar sitting in the White House - we have that right now!

Larry Sinclair came across as extremely credible in his Rense interview. Larry Sinclair's claims should be thoroughly investigated. It may not make any difference in Obama's "electability," because Gennifer Flowers didn't stop Bill Clinton from being elected, but it absolutely should be investigated. If the Obama supporters can so easily accept Ron Paul as a "racist" based upon flimsy accusations, then why no similar examination of Obama's character? Since when is illegal drug use and illicit sex "okay" and not a factor in one's ability to hold the highest office in the country and make decisions that affect millions?

It is true that the MSM is studiously ignoring the story for the moment. Sinclair himself said in his radio interview last week on Rense that all the major papers have had his story since September and are just sitting on it. Also, note that Sen. Larry Craig was arrested in June, but his story did not hit the MSM until late August. As another example of the media dragging their feet (at best) or protecting Obama (at worst), I called in to a local radio show here in Phoenix the morning after Obama spoke here this week to ask the host to please comment on Larry Sinclair's claims and how this will affect Obama's candidacy, and they would not put me on the air.

I just saw an article saying that Larry Sinclair was interviewed last night on the New York radio program, "The Right Perspective." (http://therightperspectivepodcastblog.blogspot.com/)(link)

Excerpt:

The Right Perspective will speak to Larry Sinclair, who has come forward in a YouTube video with allegations that he and US Presidential candidate Barack Obama shared a two-day, cocaine and gay sex party back in 1999.

Mr. Sinclair's bombshell charges came out (no pun intended) just days before the hotly-contested South Carolina primary two weeks ago and have been largely ignored by the mainstream media, save for conspiracy radio host Jeff Rense, who only interviewed Mr. Sinclair first due to technical difficulties at The Right Perspective.

Then, on "Hello, Africa!", veteran New Zealand anti-apartheid campaigner John Minto, will talk with Frank and John about why he recently turned down a nomination for the South African Companion of OR Tambo Award for foreigners.

Be sure to listen to The Right Perspective tonight starting 10pm EDT (05:00 South African time) at the link at the top right. You can also call in with your questions at 718-761-9996.

I wished I had seen that so I could have listened. If there is anyone who may know if they have an archive of the interview, please post a link.

Thanks.

Redcard

02-01-2008, 02:14 PM

I cannot believe you guys think this is serious.

I mean, seriously. This is beyond the pale. We should not be connecting ourselves to this unsubstantiated rumor.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 02:18 PM

I cannot believe you guys think this is serious.

I mean, seriously. This is beyond the pale. We should not be connecting ourselves to this unsubstantiated rumor.

How can you say it is "not serious" and "unsubstantiated?" Please explain.

Young_Apprentice

02-01-2008, 02:27 PM

In the words of Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

hm?

Birdie

02-01-2008, 02:30 PM

Indeed. Well, so far he has provided quite a lot of specific details and evidence to support his claims, which is why I said he came across as very credible.

I would also think that one would be extremely cautious about making slanderous claims against someone as high-profile and wealthy as Obama, because if it weren't true, he would obviously be found guilty in a lawsuit and face a hefty financial judgment and perhaps jail time.

RonRules

02-01-2008, 02:33 PM

I always thought Obama was a diversionary tactic to keep the media off Hillary. Obama has plenty of dirt around him like the Slumlord that bought the land under his house for 30% above the market price, allowing him to buy a $1.6 mil house at much lower cost.

That's stuff will come out if Hillary is in peril. Obama is the ultimate scapegoat, but he doesn't' know.

RonRules

02-01-2008, 02:37 PM

What concerns me is the use of crack cocaine. I have to undergo random drug tests as an aerospace worker. I see NO PROBLEM checking presidential candidates for drug use.

Redcard

02-01-2008, 02:41 PM

How can you say it is "not serious" and "unsubstantiated?" Please explain.

Uh.

Easily.

Not serious:

A youtube video proclaiming something without any evidence.

Unsubstantiated:

Without substantiation. Without evidence of any type lending to a state of truthfulness.

Young_Apprentice

02-01-2008, 02:47 PM

Uh.

Easily.

Not serious:

A youtube video proclaiming something without any evidence.

Unsubstantiated:

Without substantiation. Without evidence of any type lending to a state of truthfulness.

BUt....but....but...dont you know that you should believe everything till you have evidence to prove otherwise?!

Redcard

02-01-2008, 02:59 PM

BUt....but....but...dont you know that you should believe everything till you have evidence to prove otherwise?!

*laughs*

Well, I am on RPF, aren't I?

Birdie

02-01-2008, 03:12 PM

Easily. Not serious: A youtube video proclaiming something without any evidence.

Unsubstantiated: Without substantiation. Without evidence of any type lending to a state of truthfulness.

a video proclaiming "something..."

Well, personally I consider illegal drug use and infidelity to be serious matters, so I don't get how you can call his claim "not serious." Why? Because it was on YouTube? So what? If the MSM had held a press conference, would that have "changed" the seriousness of his claims?

And, I guess you have not listened to his interview. Sinclair's claims are hardly without substantiation or evidence. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Young_Apprentice

02-01-2008, 03:15 PM

Does he have pictures? Does he have sheets with Obama juice all over them? Anything?

Redcard

02-01-2008, 03:18 PM

a video proclaiming "something..."

Well, personally I consider illegal drug use and infidelity to be serious matters, so I don't get how you can call his claim "not serious." Why? Because it was on YouTube? So what? If the MSM had held a press conference, would that have "changed" the seriousness of his claims?

And, I guess you have not listened to his interview. Sinclair's claims are hardly without substantiation or evidence. Quite the contrary, in fact.

No, they really are without substantiation and evidence. Seriously.. you guys will believe anything if its in a Youtube video said by someone convincing.

I can produce a similar video calling Ron Paul a racist and making up some evidence, and you'd want more substantiation. Don't you think that's a fair thing to require of a man before you go and accuse him of gay sex and illegal drug use and infidelity in the middle of a campaign?

Because I'll tell you what... it'll link back to this campaign, and if it's anywhere close to unprovable, bye bye Ron Paul's chances forever.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 03:19 PM

He has his plane ticket and hotel receipts from his trip and a third party witness - the man who arranged the introduction between him and Obama.

Redcard

02-01-2008, 03:20 PM

He has his plane ticket and hotel receipts from his trip and a third party witness - the man who arranged the introduction between him and Obama.

And did Obama pay for the room? Did anyone else see them? Was Obama in the area at the time?

I can do ALL those things too, about anyone in the world.

Remember, the FBI had similar "evidence" on MLK, and it turned out to all be made up by them.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 03:20 PM

Because I'll tell you what... it'll link back to this campaign, and if it's anywhere close to unprovable, bye bye Ron Paul's chances forever.

That's really absurd.

Ron Paul's campaign is not going to be affected by Obama having to defend himself in the least.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 03:22 PM

And did Obama pay for the room? Did anyone else see them? Was Obama in the area at the time?

No, Sinclair paid for the room. He says they went to his room for the first encounter and that Obama came to his room for the second encounter. Yes, he says someone else introduced them initially and accompanied them to the hotel on their first encounter.

Redcard

02-01-2008, 03:23 PM

That's really absurd.

Ron Paul's campaign is not going to be affected by Obama having to defend himself in the least.

No, you don't get it , do you?

This is typical Karl Rove manuevering. Once it gets found out, who do you think gets blamed? Hillary? HAH!

No way. The Dems will blame the Republicans.. the Republicans will look shocked and looked around.. and then.. someone.. will come up with a link to this forum. Then, suddenly, on Youtube, someone will "Find out" that this "Obama Blow Job" guy was really a member of this forum.

Come on. It's so painfully obvious that this is a set up.

Birdie

02-01-2008, 03:34 PM

No, you don't get it , do you?

This is typical Karl Rove manuevering. Once it gets found out, who do you think gets blamed? Hillary? HAH!

No way. The Dems will blame the Republicans.. the Republicans will look shocked and looked around.. and then.. someone.. will come up with a link to this forum. Then, suddenly, on Youtube, someone will "Find out" that this "Obama Blow Job" guy was really a member of this forum.

Actually, I'm starting to think you don't get it. You're actually quite wrong, in that the only people who are blaming Ron Paul's campaign are a couple of lower-level liberal bloggers, while the higher-profile liberal bloggers and virtually all commenters on this topic are blaming Hillary's campaign.

Either way, it doesn't affect Obama to have people committing an indirect smear of another candidate by trying to say their campaign is "responsible."

BTW, Larry Sinclair, as an "out" gay man doesn't personally strike me as the type who would be an endorser of Ron Paul's campaign.

NewsGuy

02-07-2008, 02:53 AM

I think it is terrible that bloggers are pointing to Ron Paul's campaign as being the "source" of the Larry Sinclair story. Obviously, a "dirty trick" of this kind is just not Ron Paul's style (although it may be Hillary's style.) The only common thread of interest in Ron Paul supporters and Larry Sinclair is the demand for truth from our elected representatives, including the President.

This is why Larry Sinclair's claims are important. It goes toward Barack Obama's credibility as a Presidential candidate if he is lying about past drug use and if he has been unfaithful to his family. We don't need another liar sitting in the White House - we have that right now!

Larry Sinclair came across as extremely credible in his Rense interview. Larry Sinclair's claims should be thoroughly investigated. It may not make any difference in Obama's "electability," because Gennifer Flowers didn't stop Bill Clinton from being elected, but it absolutely should be investigated. If the Obama supporters can so easily accept Ron Paul as a "racist" based upon flimsy accusations, then why no similar examination of Obama's character? Since when is illegal drug use and illicit sex "okay" and not a factor in one's ability to hold the highest office in the country and make decisions that affect millions?

It is true that the MSM is studiously ignoring the story for the moment. Sinclair himself said in his radio interview last week on Rense that all the major papers have had his story since September and are just sitting on it. Also, note that Sen. Larry Craig was arrested in June, but his story did not hit the MSM until late August. As another example of the media dragging their feet (at best) or protecting Obama (at worst), I called in to a local radio show here in Phoenix the morning after Obama spoke here this week to ask the host to please comment on Larry Sinclair's claims and how this will affect Obama's candidacy, and they would not put me on the air.

I just saw an article saying that Larry Sinclair was interviewed last night on the New York radio program, "The Right Perspective." (http://therightperspectivepodcastblog.blogspot.com/)(link)

Excerpt:

I wished I had seen that so I could have listened. If there is anyone who may know if they have an archive of the interview, please post a link.

Thanks.

Hi, I'm the producer of The Right Perspective and I stumbled across this post while doing a search. Larry was supposed to be on last week but canceled at the last minute due to health reasons (he claimed to be calling from a hospital emergency room when he canceled the interview).

Larry will be on this Friday (Feb. 8) and you can hear the interview at 10:00pm EDT over the Internet at www.therightperspective.com (http://www.therightperspective.com) - click on the link at the right that says "listen live". You can also call in with your questions (or voice your opinions after the interview) by calling into the show at 718-761-9996.

Just to add that The Right Perspective has never endorsed Ron Paul's campaign, although I myself do like Dr. Paul's Constitutional message and real conservatism.

GoldStan

02-07-2008, 08:56 AM

Wow I guess in a place where the majority of the posters believe in conpiracy theories a YouTube video posted by some idiot constitutes "proof". Further than CNN and FOX aren't running this every 20 minutes is "proof" of an MSM plot.

No wonder we did so badly in this campaign. Thanks a ton for killing the RP campaign Troofers.

constituent

02-07-2008, 09:01 AM

constituent

02-07-2008, 09:02 AM

Redcard

02-07-2008, 09:03 AM

obamabot.

Fine.

Go ahead, investigate this.

When it comes back on us, and then opens up the Ron Paul Newsletters/racism/KKK/stormfront bullshit, don't come whining back here about how it's just so unfair.

constituent

02-07-2008, 09:05 AM

Fine.

Go ahead, investigate this.

When it comes back on us, and then opens up the Ron Paul Newsletters/racism/KKK/stormfront bullshit, don't come whining back here about how it's just so unfair.

blah blah blah.

i don't care about the story either way.

comes back on us? lol.

oh, and i know some of the folks who are admittedly behind the release of those letters, not that i was ever whining about them, nor the exploitation of them...

i think dr. paul handled the situation expertly.

i swear redcard, you can be such a collectivist sometimes that it's unreal.

GoldStan

02-07-2008, 09:05 AM

nice first post.

I hope you actually mean that. Perspective and rationality seems to be out of fashion here. I have lurked on these boards for a long time but frankly I just can't hold my peace about what actually took this campaign off the rails anymore.

constituent

02-07-2008, 09:08 AM

I hope you actually mean that. Perspective and rationality seems to be out of fashion here. I have lurked on these boards for a long time but frankly I just can't hold my peace about what actually took this campaign off the rails anymore.

you're right... it's everyone else's fault.

particularly some imaginary group that exists only in the minds of dolts,
lead by the whims and cheerleading of the MSM.

if anything hurt this campaign, it was the dumbass republifascists who
helped build this screwed up system...

but,
w/ever.

MsDoodahs

02-07-2008, 09:48 AM

I've rarely if ever noticed anyone commenting on how high Ron's negatives were in the polls.

Getting rid of the FBI? Why, that's CRAZY TALK!

Getting rid of the IRS? Why, that's INSANE!

I think the truthers provided another channel for the MSM to paint Dr. Paul as a kook, and that label stuck.

I believe the "crazy" "insane" "kook" stuff is why Ron's negatives have been so consistently high.

New ideas are always painted as "crazy" "insane" and "kooky."

That's how humans are.

JMO, YMMV.