Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: BodyProSite on December 28, 2009, 05:35:09 AM
-
NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA
Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science
major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983.
In 2008, Root says of Obama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me.I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia
. Ever! Nobody recalls him. I’m not exaggerating, I’m not kidding.”
Root adds that he was also, like Obama, “Class of ‘83 political science, pre-law” and says, “You don’t get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.
At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me.
No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?
It’s very strange.” Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Allyn_Root#column-one
NOTE: Root graduated as Valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School , then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a Political Science major (in the same class as President Barack Obama WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IN)
Is this yet another LIE being exposed?????????
-
"Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook "
See, it is very odd inconsistencies like this that add up. Doesn't prove a thing, but a guy unique as obama isn't easily forgotten.
-
Body - dont bother - the knee padders will be silent on this.
I have tried over and over with these no-nothings and they refuse to accept the fact that they were duped, suckered, and voted for a man with no record, no credentials, nothing.
Now the rest of us have to endure this tyrannical nightmare all because these idiots wanted to hope & change.
-
i am sure they will be, i just wanted to post these for people that may have started reading after the dates that you posted similar stuff, i started reading this board after that time so i had no idea you posted about obamas books
-
"Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook "
See, it is very odd inconsistencies like this that add up. Doesn't prove a thing, but a guy unique as obama isn't easily forgotten.
The same thing happened with the Harvard Law Review.
240 - I was on law review and EVERYONE has to usually publish an article to get there. Oddly enough, he never published a damn thing and the other editors said he was NEVER there.
-
yea i read that article too and quotes from many people that were at harvard during the time he was supposedly there
-
yea i read that article too and quotes from many people that were at harvard during the time he was supposedly there
Also - as an alleged constitutional law profressor, you usually have to publish works and academic articles. What did Obama ever publish?
Answer?
NOTHING.
-
"The same thing happened with the Harvard Law Review.
240 - I was on law review and EVERYONE has to usually publish an article to get there. Oddly enough, he never published a damn thing and the other editors said he was NEVER there. "
That's seriously interesting. Imagine going to two major universities and being a star, and not leaving a footprint.
The response, from a debate standpoint, would be:
"Oh, so now the state of hawaii and both universities are in on this conspiracy"?
-
"The same thing happened with the Harvard Law Review.
240 - I was on law review and EVERYONE has to usually publish an article to get there. Oddly enough, he never published a damn thing and the other editors said he was NEVER there. "
That's seriously interesting. Imagine going to two major universities and being a star, and not leaving a footprint.
The response, from a debate standpoint, would be:
"Oh, so now the state of hawaii and both universities are in on this conspiracy"?
No, its just that his entire resume is a falsified farce and the perfect example of puffery if one ever existed.
People like yourself bought into the hype and sham and only now are beginning to realize you were duped.
-
For the 198th time, I voted for Barr :)
-
well its proven that the dem party will buy anybody they can, i am sure senators in ha. would conseal his records for some money, hell look at 13 states in the country, they accepted bribes. and i am sure a dean of a university is a cheap bribe!!
-
most interesting part of the story is that FOX news interviewed 400 columbia grads for this story.
They are quietly getting behind the birther movement ;)
Also interesting are the EXACT same tactics used to pre-emptively smear the CT in its infancy. I haven't seen this since, oh, 2002...
-
most interesting part of the story is that FOX news interviewed 400 columbia grads for this story.
They are quietly getting behind the birther movement ;)
Also interesting are the EXACT same tactics used to pre-emptively smear the CT in its infancy. I haven't seen this since, oh, 2002...
Im not trying to advance the birther issue, but there are other issues that simply dont match up with common sense. For example - who paiud for Obama's tuition for 7 years?
Additionally, Obama was sold as some brilliant academic, when he is not, never was, and never will be.
They had to sell the lie to push forward someone with no record whatsoever.
-
if indeed these things are true, how is it a smear campaign rather than just good journalism and reporting of factual evidence, so far there is nothing to show that they are not true, obama is spending millions to hide every single thing he can. when in history has a president spent millions to hide his public records , school records so on and so forth?
-
i saw the same people, tactics, labels employed the moment this birther CT arrived. I'm talking a 3 week campaign on all the media outlets. We all saw it. They presented the CT as loony and mocked those who believed.
We saw this exact tactic before ;)
-
i saw the same people, tactics, labels employed the moment this birther CT arrived. I'm talking a 3 week campaign on all the media outlets. We all saw it. They presented the CT as loony and mocked those who believed.
We saw this exact tactic before ;)
240 - can you please explain this to me?
________________________ ______________
Obama's records that are not released.
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate - - Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or 'not available'
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--'not available'
-
and why spend endlessly to keep them hidden?
-
So we see articles saying he was quiet and unknown at columbia, then blossomed at harvard.
33, your response?
-
1. I will post the article that exposes the farce that Mons posted.
2. Read below. I was on Law Review myself and know exactly how it works. The fact is that EVERYONE ON LAW REVIEW HAS TO PUBLISH - PERIOD.
_____________________
Monday, June 23, 2008
Why didn't Obama publish anything in the law journal he edited?
"Obama kept Law Review balanced," according to the title of an article by Jeffrey Ressner and Ben Smith on the Politico website. By that, they mean that during his one-year term as president of the Harvard Law Review, Barack Obama gave final approval to the publication of articles by law professors, and shorter "notes" by student authors, that reflected a wide range of differing viewpoints.
That is tantamount to saying that he did his job acceptably well. It's mildly interesting, but not nearly as interesting as an Obama mystery that Ressner and Smith mention — and then leave completely unresolved!
[NOTE: Many weeks after I wrote this post, Smith and Ressner have published a new article entitled Exclusive: Obama's lost law review article, reporting that Obama actually did write an unsigned "case comment" for the HLR in which he analyzed an Illinois Supreme Court case which held that a fetus has no tort rights to sue its mother for money damages for injuries sustained due to the mother's alleged negligence. More details here. — Beldar, Fri Aug 22, 2008 @ 8:30pm.]
*******
Every law review attempts to foster its own credibility by developing and maintaining a reputation for objectivity and open-mindedness. Even though the teaching faculties at law schools like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Columbia are overwhelmingly liberal in their own political persuasions, and even though they tend to espouse legal philosophies that reflect their politics, their respective schools' law journals, which are actually student-edited and -run, continue to publish articles written from other and contrary points of view — and to do so with at least enough regularity as to encourage such writers to continue submit their work for review and possible publication.
In my own days as a member and then an editor of the Texas Law Review (1978-1980), I was among the few political conservatives on the staff or editorial board. Some of the fiercest, sharpest, and most principled political arguments I've ever participated in took place there. But making persuasive arguments was what counted among this crew, both when we editors were informally arguing among ourselves over whether Jimmy Carter ought to use military force to free the U.S. Embassy captives in Tehran and when we were formally discussing whether to publish a particular professor's manuscript.
As for Ressner's and Smith's other reporting: That Obama was polite; that he chatted up the law professors he worked with; that he made them feel like he was improving their writing with his editing; and that he was on the lookout for rising young talents: These are all job requirements for any law review editor, at any law review, in any given year. Perhaps Ressner and Smith think that what's merely competent is actually quite exceptional. They certainly go on to show that they're clueless about the role of law reviews in legal scholarship generally:
In Obama's time, as it is today, the Harvard Law Review was one of the most important and distinguished legal publications in the world. Founded in 1887, it is the rare self-supporting legal publication compiled and edited completely by students, typically those attending their second or third year at the prestigious school.
No, guys, that's not rare. It's universal. That's the way it is at law schools all around the United States, and that's the way it's been at least since the early 20th Century. Having its most prestigious and important professional journals controlled and edited by students is something nearly unique to the legal profession. (My blogospheric friend Prof. Stephen Bainbridge is among more than a few law professors who've publicly suggested that this system is not just irritating, but nuts. And he may be right, but it nevertheless still is the current system.)
*******
There is at least one respect, however, in which what Barack Obama participated in at Harvard must have been very different from what I and others had experienced at Texas some years earlier. Ressner and Smith report that Obama "beat out 18 other contenders" to become president of the Harvard Law Review. Those would have been classmates of his, all of them about to enter their third and final years of law school. And that's a remarkably large number of competitors for the top slot — more people, in fact, than we had on our entire editorial board at Texas (even though Harvard and Texas are similarly sized and comparatively very large law schools).
What Ressner and Smith describe at Harvard — and I've read other, similar descriptions of the HLR and of Obama's election as its first black president — make me believe its editorial board selection was remarkably, overtly political as compared to most other law journals. How could it be otherwise, when it apparently depended on a vote among all of one's direct (same-year) peers and competitors who together made up the journal's membership?
At Texas, by contrast, second year students applied in writing to the outgoing editorial board (which was composed of graduating third-year students) for whatever board slot or slots they sought. The outgoing board then made its selections with, as in all other things, the editor-in-chief (the job title used by most law reviews instead of "president") having the final say. At least in my year, there was remarkably little that was contentious in the process. The outgoing book review editor, for example, correctly perceived in me a kindred spirit who would be well suited to matching up newly publish legal books with prominent faculty authors around the country, and suggested I apply to fill his slot. (We actively solicited book reviewers, in contrast to articles, which generally were submitted to us, unsolicited, by law professors.) Several other of my classmates who were particularly good at mentoring were likewise nudged toward applying for positions as "note editors" who'd be working with the following class' new members. Our managing editor, in turn, was encouraged to apply for that slot by the outgoing board based on her drill-sergeant effectiveness.
There was an ample basis for the outgoing editors to make these evaluations: Besides the applications, the second-year students had been doing "scut work" at the direction of the editors — including huge amounts of "cite-checking" (source verification) and galleys proof-reading — throughout the previous year. Most importantly of all, however, second-year members were required, upon penalty of being kicked off the Review, to produce, on deadline, a publishable quality "student note." At Texas and most other top 20 law journals, such student notes tend to be not much different, either in scope or length or even quality, from the articles submitted by aspiring young law professors hoping to publish to promote their tenure prospects. We'd moved away from the earlier practice of having students write shorter, more limited "case-notes" that typically focused on a single new judicial decision, and instead encouraged more ambitious writing that would genuinely add something creative and new to the legal literature.
It was quite typical at Texas (and, I think, at most other major law reviews) that each new editor-in-chief, in fact, would be the student who, as a second-year member, had produced and published the very best student note. In the class ahead of me, my own class, and the class behind me at Texas, there was a wide-spread consensus on whose notes were the best. It is inconceivable to me that any of the three of them would have been selected to be editor-in-chief if they hadn't written a publishable note at all. And indeed, the quality of their respective notes became the source of the each new editor-in-chief's credibility as first among equals, final decision-maker, and the only editor permitted to use a blue pencil for his copy-editing (which no other editor would dare erase or alter without close consultation).
In fact, there were three ways to become a member of the Texas Law Review in the first place: Those who'd been in the top five percent of their first-year class were automatically offered membership at the beginning of their second year. (Some who "graded on" this way nevertheless declined membership, typically because they weren't willing to commit to writing a publishable-quality note or to run the risk of failing to produce one on time.) A roughly equal number of other slots went to the winners of a grueling research-and-writing competition for second-year students. And rarely but occasionally, a student would earn an invitation by writing and submitting, all on his own, a publishable-quality student note.
Occasionally someone would write a publishable quality note that didn't actually get published. Someone might spend six months, for example, researching and writing on a topic that seemed very timely and appropriate when the student had first proposed it at the beginning of his second year, when he or she was a brand new member; but then an unexpected court ruling or new statute might suddenly moot the topic, or change the field so dramatically that what had been written by the student no longer was particularly valuable. Indeed, to try to avoid just this sort of calamity, the topic approval process was itself very detailed, and it included a "preemption check" by other students to try to determine whether there were any such pending cases or statutes lurking in the works that needed to be considered.
Otherwise, though, at Texas and, I believe, most other major law reviews, the rule for members was (and I think still is): "Publish or perish, up or out." If you didn't produce a publishable-quality note on deadline, your name was stricken from the membership list on the masthead, you had no opportunity to become an editor, and — worst of all — you became ethically obliged to call back all those employers who'd extended you job offers in part based on a résumé credential that you were no longer entitled to claim.
No one wanted to make those telephone calls.
(My own student note is abstracted here, by the way; and yes, it, along with my grades and sparkling personality, was a key in my becoming the book review editor on the 1979-1980 TLR editorial board, getting my judicial clerkship with Judge Carolyn King of the Fifth Circuit, and then getting a job at Houston's Baker Botts.)
*******
With which background, perhaps you can better appreciate the most peculiar thing in Ressner's and Smith's article on Obama (boldface mine):
One thing Obama did not do while with the review was publish any of his own work. Campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said Obama didn't write any articles for the Review, though his two semesters at the helm did produce a wide range of edited case analyses and unsigned "notes" from Harvard students.
How remarkable is this for Harvard? I have no first-hand information, obviously. But among the legal celebrities whom Ressner and Smith quote in their article is Susan Estrich, who they describe as "the USC School of Law professor who served as Michael Dukakis' campaign manager in 1988 — and who broke ground as the first female president of the Harvard Law Review 14 years before Obama took the reins" (emphasis mine, brackets by Ressner and Smith):
Estrich believes that Obama must have had something published that year, even if his campaign says otherwise. "They probably don't want [to] have you [reporters] going back" to examine the Review.
Oh, pish-posh. If Obama had actually authored one of the unsigned student notes that was published, he surely would admit to it — it's another objective credential, and he and his campaign certainly brag about his supposed constitutional law expertise at the drop of a hat. Given that he never published anything while an instructor at the University of Chicago Law School later, it would be his only written evidence (besides his magna cum laude degree) of genuine academic excellence in the law. Thus, Estrich's comment leads me to believe that the Harvard Law Review, too, had a "Publish or Perish" requirement — but it's one that Obama didn't meet for reasons that are entirely unclear, and that he's now "scrupulously managing his biography" to obscure.
My bologna detector tells me there's more to the story here. So which of his former co-members or -editors will be the first to squeal on him? Or is there the Rule of Omertà among them?
-
So the guy came into his own at Harvard. Not shocking.
I'm curious as to what 333 is implying. Is he saying that Obama's Columbia degree was conjured out of thin air? Who gives a shit either way. Undergrad = insignificant.
-
So the guy came into his own at Harvard. Not shocking.
I'm curious as to what 333 is implying. Is he saying that Obama's Columbia degree was conjured out of thin air? Who gives a shit either way. Undergrad = insignificant.
What i'm saying is that his so called " editorship" of HLR was a sham, like everything else. I was on law review and know many others who were, EVERYONE HAS TO PUBLISH AN ACADEMIC WORK.
-
"Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook "
See, it is very odd inconsistencies like this that add up. Doesn't prove a thing, but a guy unique as obama isn't easily forgotten.
I don't know if you're factually correct 240.
He's mentioned even on the College alumni website.
http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/jan_feb09/alumni_corner
And this College magazine is from back in JANUARY 2005 - before he started his campaign. But perhaps he's a "Manchurian Candidate" ::)
http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct_archive/jan05/cover.php
-
Obama even paid off the bookstore attendant. incredible. Does his treachery know no bounds?
-
"And this College magazine is from back in JANUARY 2005 - before he started his campaign. "
The person who gives the intro speech at the political conventions is usually considered the front-runner (or one of the top 2) for the next presidential election. Rudy gave the one for the repubs that year.
i'm not quite on the birther bandwagon, but I do think he was running in 04.
-
Obama even paid off the bookstore attendant. incredible. Does his treachery know no bounds?
No one is saying he didnt go there, its just odd that no one ever rememkbers him there, not the professors, not the students, no one.
Hugo's clip is probably true.
-
www.theobamafile.com
________________________ ___________
In 1981, in search of a community to belong to, he transfers to that prestigious university on the edge of Harlem -- Columbia, where he majors in political science with a specialization in international relations. He also swapped drugs for Marxism.
Obama says he was somewhat involved with the Black Students Organization and participated in anti-apartheid activities. "Mostly, my years at Columbia were an intense period of study," he says. "When I transferred, I decided to buckle down and get serious. I spent a lot of time in the library. I didn’t socialize that much. I was like a monk."
Obama says it is difficult to separate his college experience at Columbia from the urban experience of living in New York City, and his memoir offers little about his time on campus
When Obama arrived in New York, he already knew Sohale "Hal" Siddiqi, a drug addicted illegal alien from Pakistan, who was a friend of Chandoo's and Hamid's from Karachi, who had visited them at Occidental College.
He had come to New York from London two years earlier and found his caustic wit and unabashed desire to make money perfectly pitched to the city’s mood. He had overstayed his tourist visa and now made a living in New York’s high-turnover, illegal immigrant workforce, waiting on tables.
In 1982, Siddiqi and Obama got an apartment at a sixth-floor walk-up on East 94th Street.
In "The Book," Siddiqi is identified only as "Sadik" -- a short, well-built Pakistani" who smoked marijuana, snorted cocaine and liked to party. They were roomies for a while. Siddiqi confirmed Obama's account that he turned serious in New York and "stopped getting high."
Watching Sadik's drugging obviously got Obama's attention.
"I stopped getting high. I ran 3 miles a day and fasted on Sundays. For the first time in years I applied myself to my studies and started keeping a journal of daily reflections and very bad poetry," he wrote in "Dreams."
He went to the Marxist-Socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn and started lecturing his relatives until they worried he'd become "one of those freaks you see on the streets around here."
The Obama campaign declined to discuss Obama's time at Columbia and his friendships in general. It won't, for example, release his transcript or name his friends. It did, however, list five locations where Obama lived during his four years here: three on Manhattan's Upper West Side and two in Brooklyn -- one in Park Slope, the other in Brooklyn Heights. His memoir mentions two others on Manhattan's Upper East Side.
-
"And this College magazine is from back in JANUARY 2005 - before he started his campaign. "
The person who gives the intro speech at the political conventions is usually considered the front-runner (or one of the top 2) for the next presidential election. Rudy gave the one for the repubs that year.
i'm not quite on the birther bandwagon, but I do think he was running in 04.
He launched his campaign in Febuary 2007.
So I'd say perhaps two years before that he was contemplating running, gathering his forces.
And now you're trying to tell me he's somehow pulling the strings of a College magazine journalist to write up an article in a certain way?
Journalism doesn't work like that 240.
Sure, there may be some odd things. But have you actually bothered to research any facts about Obama's school years, or are you just accepting others words that it is a "mystery"?
I did a little googling and found those two links that were fairly contradicting to what the whole "No School Movement" is claimning.
-
THIS IS FROM SOMEONE IN THE VERY SAME DEPARTMENT OBAMA IS SAID TO HAVE GRADUATED WITH.
________________________ ________________________ ___________
Obama graduated from Columbia College in 1983, and after spending a year in New York, moved to Chicago.
Wayne Allyn Root says, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knows him, and they all know me. I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia. Ever! ... Nobody recalls him. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not kidding.
Questioner: Were you the exact same class?
Root: Class of '83 political science, pre-law Columbia University. You don't get more exact than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him. At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, 20th reunion, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! Who was he, and five years ago, nobody even knew who he was... the guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange? It's very strange...
When asked about his undergraduate training at Columbia University, The New Times states that Obama "declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."
Many of his classmates don't remember Obama. He's not in the yearbook. Columbia couldn't find a picture of him at school.
What can be said with some certainty is that Mr. Obama lived off campus while at Columbia in 1981-83 and made few friends. Fox News contacted some 400 of his classmates and found no one who remembered him. He had transferred from Occidental College in California after his sophomore year because, he told the Boston Globe in 1990, "I was concerned with urban issues and I wanted to be around more black folks in big cities."
Here is an in-depth interview with Wayne Allen Root.
-
Why are you so wrapped up in this guy's undergrad career? It doesn't mean shit. Do you honestly think his degree was conjured out of thin air? You can't honestly tell me you think it was fabricated. Wouldn't someone have stepped up and said that they went to class with him at another school?
-
Why are you so wrapped up in this guy's undergrad career? It doesn't mean shit. Do you honestly think his degree was conjured out of thin air? You can't honestly tell me you think it was fabricated. Wouldn't someone have stepped up and said that they went to class with him at another school?
What I am telling you is that you, who voted for him, were sold a bogus myth that does not exist.
We have a president and admn that is the product of false advertising and nothing else.
-
Mons - its a bogus article. So he was a friendly guy, BFD!
I was on law review and actually had to publish an article for it.
I will post the article later from the peoiple who actually worked with him that said he never did shit and was only there to accept phoney accolades and praises for stuff he never did. Wow, where did we hear that before?
-
What I am telling you is that you, who voted for him, were sold a bogus myth that does not exist.
We have a president and admn that is the product of false advertising and nothing else.
I didn't vote for him.
However, I don't see the point of scrutinizing this guy's undergrad degree. First off, in this day and age, undergrad degrees don't mean squat. On top of it, you're acting as if it was fabricated. So what are you saying? That he doesn't have an undergrad degree? Or maybe that everyone at the school he did go to was killed to cover it up? Huff and puff all you want, he'll still be President.
-
I didn't vote for him.
However, I don't see the point of scrutinizing this guy's undergrad degree. First off, in this day and age, undergrad degrees don't mean squat. On top of it, you're acting as if it was fabricated. So what are you saying? That he doesn't have an undergrad degree? Or maybe that everyone at the school he did go to was killed to cover it up? Huff and puff all you want, he'll still be President.
It undercuts the fabricated myth that we have some brilliant genius as president when the complete opposite appears to be the case.
-
It undercuts the fabricated myth that we have some brilliant genius as president when the complete opposite appears to be the case.
So do you think his Columbia degree was fabricated out of thin air? What college did he go to then? Surely someone from the true school he went to would have stepped up and said that they were in class with him. Or do you think that he doesn't have a college degree?
-
So do you think his Columbia degree was fabricated out of thin air? What college did he go to then? Surely someone from the true school he went to would have stepped up and said that they were in class with him. Or do you think that he doesn't have a college degree?
Of course I think he went there, but since none of his records, transcripts, or anything whatsoever has ever been released, no one really knows WTF we are dealing with here. I know if it were me, people would remember me from Manhattan College or Law School.
-
"I know if it were me, people would remember me from Manhattan College or Law School. "
A good janitor is hard to forget!
;D
-
"I know if it were me, people would remember me from Manhattan College or Law School. "
A good janitor is hard to forget!
;D
Ha ha. 3.96 undergrad. 3.65 law school and passed the bar in the top 5% of all takers.
Also - I was competing in shows at the time as was a friend of mine who was enormous. So we stood out at the time as well.
-
what kind of law you practice 333?
-
haha that's summa cum laude, i believe.
i was magna for my MBA. and yeah, i can name most of the ppl I went to school with at the grad leve. at undergrad, when you have 400 in a class, i can see some slipping thru cracks.
-
what kind of law you practice 333?
Commercial debt collection, liens, and some real estate.
-
i got a question that i am gona pm you , its cool if you dont wnat to reply
-
This whole thing is nuts.We dont need any of this to know Obama is a racist,we have his books and him sitting in a racist church for twenty years.We dont need this to know he hates industries and buisiness' we have his policies.We dont need this to know he HATES America,we have his speeches in his first year in office.All of that is interesting but the fact is what we KNOW is more then enough to prove he is an anti-white,ant-American,socialist.
-
Not one person in your article ever met him in person by my reading of that.