No account yet?
Subscription Options
Subscribe via RSS, or
 
Free Email Alert

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail alert with links to Dallas Blog posts.

New Site Search
Login
Bill DeOre
Click for Larger Image
Dallas Sports Blog
Local Team Sports News
The Official Site of the Dallas Mavericks
TEX Homepage News
News
Stars Recent Headlines
Good News Dallas
Lifestyles
Obama as Lawyer: Defender of Slumlords Print E-mail
by Tom McGregor    Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 06:44 PM

Activist Slumlord.jpgPresident Barack Obama took tremendous pride in his career as a community activist in Chicago. However, when he worked as a lawyer, he earned a sizable income for defending slumlord clients, who failed to provide proper heating for residents.

According to Fox News, “a newly published report raises questions about some established narratives in the early life of President Barack Obama, suggesting the president’s upbringing was one of privilege and not hardship.”

Apparently, while Obama worked as a community activist in Chicago’s Southside, he purchased a home in the exclusive Hyde Park.

As reported by Fox News, “a document filed with the Illinois Secretary of State shows the young lawyer (Obama) represented some well-healed clients. In one case, he represented a politically connected preacher and real estate developer, Bishop Arthur Brazier, who had failed to provide heating and running water to 15 apartments in the dead of winter. Obama’s client had all the tenants forcibly removed from the building, yet paid only a $50 fine under Obama’s legal counsel.”

Robert Fitch, the late radical journalist who specialized in urban politics, said, “what we see is that the Chicago core of the Obama Coalition is made of blacks, who’ve moved up by moving poor blacks out.”

To read the entire article from Fox News, link here:

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Share This Story on Facebook
Comments (4)add comment
...
written by Travis , September 21, 2012

Kinda reminds me of Lincoln, who represented railroads against farmers, farmers against banks, banks against other banks, banks against railroads, farmers against banks - whoever paid his fee.

That IS the job of a lawyer. To represent his client, no?



...
written by Jonathan Green , September 21, 2012



If you're a Romney partisan, and you've seen Barack Obama move ahead in the polls over the last couple of weeks, you may be saying to yourself, "Maybe the debates can save him." After all, the four debates (three presidential, one VP) are the the only planned events between now and election day. Though you never know what kind of unexpected events might occur, tens of millions of voters will be watching. And so many times in the past, the race has been transformed by a dramatic debate moment.

Except that's actually not true. As John Sides lays out quite well, after all the sound and fury, debates almost never change the trajectory of the race. Of course, something never happens up until the moment that it happens, but there's strong reason to believe that the debates will change nothing this year in particular. But before I get to that, here's Sides:

Why are presidential debates so often inconsequential? After all, many voters do pay attention. Debates routinely attract the largest audience of any televised campaign event. And voters do learn new information, according to several academic studies. But this new information is not likely to change many minds. The debates occur late in the campaign, long after the vast majority of voters have arrived at a decision. Moreover, the debates tend to attract viewers who have an abiding interest in politics and are mostly party loyalists. Instead of the debates affecting who they will vote for, their party loyalty affects who they believe won the debates. For example, in a CNN poll after one of the 2008 debates, 85 percent of Democrats thought that Obama had won, but only 16 percent of Republicans agreed.

All those memorable gaffes—George H.W. looking at his watch, Michael Dukakis not pounding his lecturn at the suggestion of his wife's rape and murder, Al Gore sighing—turn out not to have had any discernible impact on the race. What was almost certainly the most disastrous debate performance of all—Dan Quayle's in 1988—did not, you may recall, prevent him from becoming Vice President.

And this year is even less likely to produce anything significant. As James Fallows explained, Mitt Romney is at his best when he can prepare carefully, and at his worst when he's taken by surprise. Over the course of the 500 or so primary debates the Republicans held, he was clearly the most informed and serious-seeming of the GOP candidates. Of course, besting Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann in verbal combat doesn't exactly make you the Ted Williams of debating, but there's little doubt Romney will show himself to reasonably knowledgeable, for what it's worth. His problem, though, is that it isn't worth much. He doesn't need to convince Americans he can recite a ten-point plan, he needs to convince them that within him beats the heart of an actual human, one who understands and cares about them. The chances of him doing that are pretty slim.

Paul Waldman

September 20, 2012



...
written by drpc1a , September 22, 2012

I guess FOX News is considered the standard in Texas.


Tricky Mitt UNDER PAID his taxes. Donated about $4 million to charity in 2011, but claimed only $2.25 million as a deduction.
That means the Romneys voluntarily paid a higher tax rate than they were legally required.

In January, Tricky Mitt insisted, "I don't pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don't think I'd be qualified to become president."

So, Tricky Mitt said he'd be unqualified to be president if he paid more than is legally due, and then he paid more than is legally due, because of a "unique position."

Why did Tricky Mitt UNDER PAY his taxes?

1. Tricky Mitt claimed he'd always paid only what was due, and not a dollar more and that his tax rate was no less than 13%.
So with this statement on the RECORD, he was able to manipulate his tax rate by only claiming a portion of his donations to charity; 2.25 out of 4.

*If Tricky Mitt would have claimed the total $4 million in deductions, he would have an effective tax rate of ***8%***, not the 13% he'd previously claimed he paid. Do the Math!

2. Tricky Mitt has 3 yrs to amend this 2011 tax return. If you believe that his lawyer will not file an amended tax return the day after the election in order to collect the extra $225,000 and use the $1.75 million in deductions,
I have a bridge in Tacoma to sell U!

Tricky Mitt lives up to his pseudonym; he will bend the facts, mislead the masses, and he is in fact a LAIR! Just like his VP choice Lyin' Ryan!

Vote in Nov!

***Tricky Mitt Show US Your Papers!***
***¡Muéstrenoslos!***
Lyin' Ryan Had to Show U 10 Yrs of His Returns!



...
written by drpc1a , September 22, 2012

Tricky Mitt UNDER PAID his taxes. Donated about $4 million to charity in 2011, but claimed only $2.25 million as a deduction.
That means the Romneys voluntarily paid a higher tax rate than they were legally required.

In January, Tricky Mitt insisted, "I don't pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don't think I'd be qualified to become president."

So, Tricky Mitt said he'd be unqualified to be president if he paid more than is legally due, and then he paid more than is legally due, because of a "unique position."

Why did Tricky Mitt UNDER PAY his taxes?

1. Tricky Mitt claimed he'd always paid only what was due, and not a dollar more and that his tax rate was no less than 13%.
So with this statement on the RECORD, he was able to manipulate his tax rate by only claiming a portion of his donations to charity; 2.25 out of 4.

*If Tricky Mitt would have claimed the total $4 million in deductions, he would have an effective tax rate of ***8%***, not the 13% he'd previously claimed he paid. Do the Math!

2. Tricky Mitt has 3 yrs to amend this 2011 tax return. If you believe that his lawyer will not file an amended tax return the day after the election in order to collect the extra $225,000 and use the $1.75 million in deductions,
I have a bridge in Tacoma to sell U!

Tricky Mitt lives up to his pseudonym; he will bend the facts, mislead the masses, and he is in fact a LAIR! Just like his VP choice Lyin' Ryan!

Vote in Nov!

***Tricky Mitt Show US Your Papers!***
***¡Muéstrenoslos!***
Lyin' Ryan Had to Show U 10 Yrs of His Returns!




Write comment
smaller | bigger
password
 

busy
 
< Prev   Next >