Libertarianism is what your mom taught you: behave yourself and don't hit your sister.
Dr. Kenneth Bisson

OBAMA’S LIMO SEX & DRUG PARTY

By: Pam On: Feb/19/08 - 17 Comments

Posted on: February 19, 2008 |

Posted in: Barack Obama, Presidential Election '08

17 Responses to “OBAMA’S LIMO SEX & DRUG PARTY”

  1. BonBon
    February 19, 2008 - 12:38 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Interesting clip. I have some problems with it though such as he didn’t show any evidence. I’d love to hear and see what he has to prove it. Otherwise, he has no credibility.

    I know others might think the Clinton machine is behind this and that may well be true but for now I need more proof.

    And also, I can’t say this doesn’t please me because this muslim needs to be stopped. hehehe

  2. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 01:01 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Heh heh heh! The KKKlinton smear machine has swung into action; the attack dogs have been unleashed. Young Obama is now going to learn firsthand about the politics of personal destruction. He is going to understand what it’s like to get in the mud and slug it out with political vermin who are quite comfortable operating in that venue.

  3. Barack Obama » OBAMA'S LIMO SEX & DRUG PARTY
    February 19, 2008 - 01:41 PM on February 19th, 2008

    [...] Right Voices wrote an interesting post today on OBAMA’S LIMO SEX & DRUG PARTYHere’s a quick excerpt Tags: Barack, Obama,, Gay, Sex,, Larry, Sinclair [...]

  4. San Francisco Liberal
    February 19, 2008 - 02:12 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Weak. Not even worth watching.

    Clinton had better watch out…the “politics of personal destruction” will backfire on her if she goes overboard trying to take on Obama.

    Obama supporters, independants and moderates are NOT as easily influenced by these kinds of garbage-attacks as others might be.

  5. Pam
    February 19, 2008 - 02:16 PM on February 19th, 2008

    1- But Bon Bon, I thought that the only proof needed was the word of a homosexual..afterall, that’s how the left does it ;)

  6. Pam
    February 19, 2008 - 02:20 PM on February 19th, 2008

    3- Your plagiarist hasn’t even found the connection between Larry and the Hillary camp! =))

    Oh but look, he has accepted a challenge . Larry Sinclair Accepts WhiteHouse.com $100,000 Polygraph Challenge

  7. BonBon
    February 19, 2008 - 02:45 PM on February 19th, 2008

    5. How could I forget? I’m just crossing my fingers that it really is true and the Clintons are behind it. I will be laughing my a__ off =))

  8. TedintheShed
    February 19, 2008 - 03:06 PM on February 19th, 2008

    “Obama supporters, independants and moderates are NOT as easily influenced by these kinds of garbage-attacks as others might be.”

    Oh puh-leeze.

    If they are simple minded enough to believe the “change” campaign that Obama is peddling, then they are stupid enough to believe anything.

    “It feels good” is absolutely no reason to vote for anything or anyone.

  9. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 03:27 PM on February 19th, 2008

    What’s the big deal anyway about an Obama sex and drug party, anyway? For BillyJeff, that was just an average day at the office!!!

    Ba da da dum, pssh! (drum flourish)

  10. Pam
    February 19, 2008 - 03:34 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Robert, I he did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I he never told anybody to lie, not a single time – never. These allegations are false [-x :^o

  11. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 03:39 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Jay Leno, you have my permission to use the above material…

  12. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 03:42 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Pam, has there ever been a documented case of a Klinton telling the truth? In any situation, ever? I mean the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Not parsed truth, not half truth, not just a grain of truth. Pure, simple, 100% Truth. Ever? I can’t think of any right off.

    That would be an interesting project…

  13. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 03:46 PM on February 19th, 2008

    In recognition of the Democritic campaign now officially turning dirty, I have a word of advice for young Obama: Watch your back, and stay far, far away from public parks at night…

  14. Pam
    February 19, 2008 - 04:23 PM on February 19th, 2008

    12- Robert, everything they say is the truth, you just don’t recognize it because it is their truth ;))

  15. Robert
    February 19, 2008 - 06:20 PM on February 19th, 2008

    I think i understand now…it is actually a question of definition. Like what is “is”? My definition of truth does not coincide with theirs.

    I foolishly forgot that they are part of the Relativist movement, where there is no such thing as right or wrong, good or bad, truth or falsehood. Everything is situational and 100% subjective.

    That explains it.

  16. Pam
    February 19, 2008 - 07:10 PM on February 19th, 2008

    Correct again my friend! ;)

  17. FrmrArtyOffcr
    February 19, 2008 - 11:48 PM on February 19th, 2008

    I once had an ROTC instructor ask if anyone believed in situational ethics, and then began railing about there was no such thing. I kept my mouth shut but was so tempted to ask “But Sir, if a person did believe in situational ethics, wouldn’t they know that this would be a good time to NOT admit it?” Personally, I always believed that being a warrior required a certain degree of situational ethics. Ethically, it’s wrong to kill. In war, it’s not only a possibility, it’s a necessity. The situation dictates that actions that would be otherwise unethical are necessary. I have to have a lot of respect for the conscientious objectors who serve in combat zones anyway. It takes a lot more guts than I have to go into one of those places unarmed. With my neighborhood, I don’t like going into my backyard unarmed.

    Likewise when at OBC they presented us with the scenario of being low on fuel, facing being overrun and the locals refusing to accept the US military credit card for gas, I told them that I had a 5.56 credit card that insured I got all of the fuel that I needed to get out of town. When they told me that that was against the Geneva convention and I’d be court martialled, I just looked at them and said ” Hmmm, let me see… Three hots and a cot in Leavenworth and my men in friendly territory, or all of us in a Soviet POW camp? I think I’ll take option A.” The Captains didn’t like my answer, but couldn’t fault my logic.

Leave a Reply

Right Voices uses Gravatar to display individual comment author icons. If you'd like your own icon next to your name, then go to Gravatar.com and sign up - it's easy!