Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls

By
Monday, January 04, 2010 at 4:55 pm

On his radio show today, Glenn Beck accused someone, somewhere, of orchestrating phone calls about the conspiracy theory that President Obama was not born in America.

“Today there is a concerted effort on all radio stations to get birthers on the air,” said Beck. “I have to tell you, are you working for the Barack Obama administration? I mean, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.”

Beck explained his skepticism of birtherism in a back-and-forth that’s worth reading and concludes with jabs at the press and at the birthers.

“As the guy who the media says is the king of conspiracy theories, all I do are forward conspiracy theories, let me forward this conspiracy,” said Beck. “He was born here because it seems a little unlikely that somebody planted the birth records, okay, a little unlikely, in the newspapers. Now you would say, well, then why doesn’t he just produce? Good question. That one kept me up for minutes at a time, minutes.”

Follow David Weigel on Twitter


Categories & Tags: | |

Comments

298 Comments

RedGraham
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 4:58 pm

John Charlton: The Supreme Court case which will void the entire Obama presidency…
Nov. 25, 2009)— It is often asked whether the usurpation of the presidency by Barack Hussein Obama will ever have a remedy in the courts. But the fact is that there already is a remedy in the courts: the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 137 (1803).
That case was the first to expressly indicate that no action of Congress was valid if it contravened the Constitution. Since the U.S. Constitution requires that a President be a natural born citizen; and since the Supreme Court has in 4 cases used the term “natural born citizen” only in reference to one born in the U.S.A. of parents who were citizens at the time of his birth, it follows inexorably that Obama’s election as president by the Joint Session of Congress, on January 8, 2009, is null and void. Against this legal conclusion there is no argument.


Tweets that mention Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls « The Washington Independent -- Topsy.com
Pingback posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:02 pm

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by kiliffe, WashIndependent. WashIndependent said: Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls http://bit.ly/5xiutA [...]


Peter M.
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:20 pm

Oh, sure- Checkmate and all that- heard it all before.
How's that working out for you birthers?


mantis
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:26 pm

Against this legal conclusion there is no argument.

It's hard to argue with a position devoid of facts, understanding of the law or even the cases those forwarding it claim are supportive, and largely invented in the imagination of batshit crazy morons. The correct response is to point, laugh, and go about your day.


NattyB
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:30 pm

You're familiar with Marbury v. Madison, how quaint.

They teach that one in the first day of law school. Now are you familiar with Standing? Because before the Supreme Court may hear a case, there must be Standing. SCOTUS won't hear the Birther arguments, because, nobody really has Standing in this matter. Furthermore, federal courts, including the SCOTUS, will only hear “current cases and controversies.” Obama's birthplace may be a “controversy” for you personally, but, legally, this has been decided already. Under Hawaii Law, he's a US Natural Born citizen; and the US Senate confirmed his Election. So, you birthers are f—ed. EVEN IF he was actually born in Kenya etc . . . it doesn't matter, because, under the law He is a Natural Born citizen whose election was ratified by the US Senate.

My 3 favorite things about Birthers:

(a) Usage of the verb “Usurp” — I like this because I think they think it makes OBAMA sound more sinister or something.
(b) Dimestore legal analysis — I went to law school. And so did Orly Taitz apparently. So, I guess, it's a wash. In this post above, the poster writes about Marbury v. Madison, which merely lays the groundwork for Judicial Review of the Constitution. I remember how my law prof got all excited about Chief Justice John Marshall's gambit in the ruling . . . . But, the idea that this ruling would “Stop The Usurper” is pretty sad.
(c) Using “fancy sounding” words that dress up their lack of legal reasoning. — In this post we have: “follows inexorably that Obama’s election as president by the Joint Session of Congress, on January 8, 2009, is null and void;”"That case was the first to expressly indicate that no action of Congress was valid if it contravened the Constitution.”. Like, silly Birther, those grounds “no action of congress is valid if it contravened the constitution,” also works to strike down abortion laws. So, you might want to find another SCOTUS case to hang your hat on.


uberVU - social comments
Trackback posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:36 pm

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by TWI_news: Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls http://bit.ly/5xiutA...


Bill R
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 5:50 pm

Wait a minute! This was orchestrated by liberals? How does that explain the Rasmussen poll showing 70% of Republicans think Obama was born outside the US, and therefore not the legitimate POTUS? How does that explain why GOP senators and representatives have accused Obama of the same thing? Is Chuck Norris a liberal? Is Orley Taitz? Is Michelle Bachmann? Are the idiots who say Obama is not a US citizen on this comment thread really liberals? If so, then shame on you RedGrahm, you liberal poser/usurper, trying to make Birthers look like insane seditious traitors who hate America. I must admit though, Red, you are doing a great job. I'm convinced!


geoboy
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 6:00 pm

No, you've got it wrong — Beck was saying that conservative radio shows were seeking birther callers — and that this was a bad strategy because birther arguments actually help Obama — i.e., it's a political strategy as poorly conceived as some Obama administration strategies.


aarrgghh
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 6:16 pm

“ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.”

… thomas jefferson

translation: just point and laugh at these morons


Bill R
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 6:33 pm

RedGrahams second argument against an Obama Presidency, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, whereby runaway slaves were returned to slave owners at government expense, aka socialist wealth redistribution expense. Obama must be returned to his master at taxpayer expense, therefore, he can't possibly be a legitimate president, he is a runaway slave. Try that one Red, its more likely to work, and it will earn you extra brownie points from the Birther faithful. You might lose Steele and Clarence Thomas, but I suspect you think the trade would be worth it.


Homeopathy and the 10:23 project | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine | Alternative Medicine Health Wisdom
Pingback posted January 4, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

[...] Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls … [...]


amg24
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 6:56 pm

John McCain was born in Panama. Therefore not eligible to be president of the USA, as per the very eloquent explanation of Mr. RedGraham. Could you please let us know if a “non-natural born” person can hold the position of “Senator”?
Thank you…


Anthony
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 7:08 pm

Stop posting the same nonsense. You must be Orly Taitz. If the King of conspiracy theories thinks this stuff is nuts.


Anthony
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 7:11 pm

The reason is the Glenn Beck thinks the idea is absolutely crazy even for him, and seems to believe that is an attempt to make him look crazy.


Anthony
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 7:21 pm

Sorry, RedGraham actually believes that John McCain isn't an a natural born citizen. His definition is very clear. Born in one of the 50 states and both parents being American Citizens. RedGraham misquotes legal rulings. So, anything he writes about legal rulings have either been manipulated or the interpretation is just wrong.


ellid
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 8:36 pm

I keep wondering what Ol' RedkitkatbillybobwhatthefuckHRCPalin4KeyesPrez does when he's not spamming this site. Cross stitch pictures of large eyed kittens staring plaintively into pet shop windows?


ellid
Comment posted January 4, 2010 @ 10:38 pm

I'm sure that many members of Congress were born via c-section.


borderraven
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 3:23 am

Considering the US Senate is the birthplace of our laws, it makes sense to screen candidates eligibility, to prevent aliens and dual nationals from enter the Senate. It seems a purging may be needed in future elections to clean foreign influence.


borderraven
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 3:31 am

States can only declare a person a citizen of that state. Only the US Congress can decide NBC, but Congress has yet to define NBC. So, there is no law in the US Codes stating what NBC is.

Here is California Law:
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE

241. The citizens of the State are:
(a) All persons born in the State and residing within it, except
the children of transient aliens and of alien public ministers and
consuls.
(b) All persons born out of the State who are citizens of the
United States and residing within the State.

242. Persons in the State not its citizens are either:
(a) Citizens of other States; or
(b) Aliens.

270. Every person while within the State is subject to its
jurisdiction and entitled to its protection.

271. Allegiance is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which
every citizen owes to the State.

272. Allegiance may be renounced by a change of residence.

273. A citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of the
State, has the same rights and duties as a citizen of the State not
an elector.


Anthony
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:12 am

Are you suffering from a split personality.


Lyric695
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:28 am

RedGraham: The flaw in your argument is that the case that you are citing is over 200 years old. Congress has passed Title 8 sec 1401 of the US Codes since then. Title 8 is the controlling definition of Natural Born Citizenship. Regardless of how the Court ruled in a 1803 decision, the Supreme Court does not make law Congress does. The decision you are citing is valid except where it conflicts with Title 8 as far as Natural Born Citizenship is concerned. Title 8 does not require both parents to be American Citizens. It only requires that a person be born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 7:04 am

Ahoy there! Are you seriously advocating a purge? Do you actually know what that means? Or are you too busy taking videos of underage girls and making questionable remarks about Afghani women?


Dr. Maloney
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 7:52 am

Considering bordernutcase spams every forum on the Internet, he will be happy to hear that his bed-mate, Larry Sinclair, has issued a death threat to Obama. Check this out — this fool will be visited by the FBI and Secret Service:

http://candidblogger.blogspot.com/2010/01/sincl…


Beck Vs. Birthers : Delaware Liberal
Pingback posted January 5, 2010 @ 8:01 am

[...] I guess there is trouble in paradise because Beck responded to the birthers on his show, accusing th… “Today there is a concerted effort on all radio stations to get birthers on the air,” said Beck. “I have to tell you, are you working for the Barack Obama administration? I mean, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.” [...]


Antibirther
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 8:39 am

It seems a purging may be needed

A little more fiber in your diet may help you with that problem, BR.


Smart Choice Time Share Realty ,Scottsdale – Real Estate Agent … | Real Estate Finance Wisdom
Pingback posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:19 am

[...] Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls … [...]


JKiff
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:41 am

John McCain was not born in the nation of Panama. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which at the time belonged to the US. Also, he was born on an American military installation in the Canal Zone. American military installations are all American soil, regardless of where they are in the world.
Therefore, John McCain, (as much as I disagree with him and as much as I despised his idiot running mate), was indeed born in the United States of America and was/is eligible to run for the office of President.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:57 am

Um, Gerry? California isn't Hawaii.

Also, you're still wrong about the President.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:59 am

Make that a lot. Ol' Gerry has some serious work to do if he ever hopes to fit into his Navy uniform again.


Anthony
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:06 am

Shhh. The moron hasn't been listening to what makes a natural born citizen. See what happens when you us cut and paste without understanding the issues.


Google To Unveil New Mobile Phone | Easy Traffic Steps Plus
Pingback posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:26 am

[...] Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls … [...]


dress up
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 11:46 am

glen beck is a lunatic!


usernamealreadytaken
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:07 pm

Does this mean that Glenn actually checked his facts and found that Obama DID produce his birth certificate, almost a year ago? Well, it should have taken him seconds, not minutes, but he is showing some improvement. Maybe he's back on his meds.


Anthony
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:16 pm

Even though Beck is nuts, he would touch it. O'Rielly said it was stupid.


Preston
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

So maybe the Brit, Neil Sankey can succeed where the Russian immigrant (from the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic) has failed, bring it on.

Poor little Birthers (still in denial about their losses), Judge Land and now judge Carter, smack down the crazies (case dismissed).

Not even “Fake News” Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly believes the crazies, how funny.

http://trueslant.com/erikkain/2010/01/05/glenn-…

http://belowthebeltway.com/2009/10/29/bill-orei…

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence…

To all the birthers in La, La Land, it is on you to prove to all of us that your assertion is true (TOUGH WHEN YOU KEEP LOSING CASES), if there are people who were there and support your position then show us the video (everyone has a price), either put up or frankly shut-up. I heard Orly Taitz, is selling a tape (I think it’s called “Money, Lies and Video tape”). She is from Orange County, CA, now I know what the mean when they say “behind the Orange Curtain”, when they talk about Orange County, the captial of Conspiracy Theories. You know Obama has a passport, he travel abroad before he was a Senator, but I guess they were in on it.

In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme religious right (people who love to push their beliefs on others while trying to take away the rights of those they just hate) and that’s who they need to extract from their party if they real want to win. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”.

I heard that she now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC). She wants to re-establish a family values party.

I can only hope that Taitz will resist the state collectors that will be hounding her like the “ruff ruff” that she is to collect the $20K.


JEANNIEMAC
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:31 pm

In his book, Obama says it is among his papers. Not in a Hawaiian vault. If so, why doesn't he just produce the damn thing, and shut up the birthers?


JEANNIEMAC
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:33 pm

Why on earth did Judge Carter hire as a law clerk, a lawyer from the very same law firm representing defendant, Obama? Was Judge Carter threatened?


JEANNIEMAC
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:37 pm

There has been internet chatter that talk show hosts and newscasters were warned not to say anything about the birth certificate issue. Why did Pelosi sign two different Certificates of Nomination for Obama and Biden? One, with a Constitutional clause relating to eligibility, was sent to Hawaii, which requires such a clause. A second Certificate, omitting the eligibility clause. was sent to the other 49 states. Why?


katahdin
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 1:49 pm

Title 8, Section 1401 spells out the definition of a natural born citizen.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 2:26 pm

Here's your sign:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/09/birthers…

BTW, you're a lying paranoid idiot.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 2:27 pm

It's a big law firm.

And you're a paranoid, lying idiot.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 2:34 pm

Like you, irrelevant. Hawaii says he's a natural born citizen. You have no credibility or authority and you're a lying paranoid idiot.

STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.

Our President has proven to sane people the legal requirement of the U.S. Constitution for eligibility to the office of President.

A handful of paranoid, bigoted, OCD suffering losers are irrelevant. And no amount of proof would be sufficient. That's the nature of your disease.


libh8er
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 2:47 pm

Love Glenn Beck, but it seems he always stays away from “the man”. Doesn't really get into issues concerning him, only his policies. I suppose Glenn doesn't really want that fight. So much has been hidden, even Beck can't get to it.


decline2state
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 2:52 pm

Right about McCain's birth. Depending on what you you disagree with him about, hard to tell if you, JKiff, are right about that. Definitely wrong about the running mate.


katahdin
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 3:25 pm

“Internet chatter?” Then it must be true. Nobody ever lies on the internets.


RedGraham
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 3:35 pm

If we apply the provisions of British and Kenyan law to the simple facts, which Obama claims about himself — though in truth there is no publically available documentation to confirm the truth of these facts — the inescapable conclusion is that Obama was born a British subject and is now, still to this day, a British subject: a Commonwealth citizen, to be exact. AKA: Illegal-alien


TheSaneOne
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 3:59 pm

But if you apply the laws of THIS country – you know, the United States – then Obama is a Natural Born Citizen and the legal and rightful President of the United States. I don't know anything about what Kenyan law would say about this, nor do I care.


davidgoliath
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:11 pm

funny that beck says its 'liberals' when in fact its was a concerted effort of true American Patriots that understand the 'facts' that made the calls and sent emails … this is non – partisan


davidgoliath
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:16 pm

you are of course WRONG – barry soetoro is an illegal marxist kenyan usurper.
1. his kenyan father is was never a citizen of the US
2. the evidence is overwhelming he wasn't born in hawaii (what a joke) but indeed somewhere in kenya
3. when he was adopted by lolo soetoro he became an indonesian citizen and it is prohibited to have dual citizenship and barry has since never again applied for citizenship … not that he was one in the first place
4. and with indonesian citizenship he is still to this day a British subject
5. and you SHOULD care and get off you democrat / slavery party kool aid wagon and LOOK that we are under siege as American citizens …
6. barry doesnt give a rats ass about you … he is a puppet servant to his white master bankers and elites … many of whom are not of this nation
7. you better WAKE UP


Name
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:21 pm

Beck is a dumbass as are his followers


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

You're wrong, your delusional bullshit is irrelevant and you're a bigoted idiot.

Dumbass.

STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:32 pm

That's funny!


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:33 pm

Birfers are traitorous, delusional, paranoid, deranged idiots.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:36 pm

And you are still an idiot with no authority, credibility or sound reasoning.

Point out the section of the Constitution defining eligibility that even remotely backs up your delusional, erroneous, bigoted bullshit.

You can't? Gee. There's your sign.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 4:37 pm

And a pathetic attention whore as are his brain damaged, paranoid followers.


TheSaneOne
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 5:22 pm

Hey look, you got one right! #1 in your list is correct – completely irrelevant to whether BHO is a Natural Born Citizen, but you're right that his father was never a US citizen. Let me repeat the “completely irrelevant” part.

#2 is stupid. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that BHO was born in Hawaii, from the posted birth certificate to the newspaper announcements to the statements of Hawaii officials. There is zero – zippo – nada – credible evidence that he was born anywhere else.

#3 I don't believe there's any evidence that Obama was ever adopted by Soetoro, but even if he did, so what? Yes, a child under 18 can have dual citizenship and only has to choose when they turn 18. It doesn't revoke US citizenship unless they specifically do that, which they didn't. And he's still a Natural Born Citizen.

#4 Oh puh-leaze… that's just silly. He was born a US citizen (natural born US citizen) and remains one to this day.

#5 You don't like his policies. I get that. So what?

#6 You don't like Obama. I get that. So what?

#7 I'm wide awake. Furthermore, I'm rational and lucid. More than I can say about you!


mantis
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:01 pm

Tinfoil's a bit snug there, isn't it birthtard?


libh8er
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:29 pm

Maybe you should quit the name calling and try to say something intelligent.


NovaMan
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:32 pm

She doesn't say “birth certificate” she says “original vital records”. Second, the HI Health Director is not the one empowered in America to make the decision. So the other 320,000,000 Americans are just supposed to take her word for it? That is ridiculous.


xcott
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:42 pm

You want us to apply British and Kenyan law instead of American law? This is the USA, and the laws that apply in the USA are American laws written by people that we elect. It doesn't matter one whit what British or Kenyan law says about citizenship.

For example, if I bribed some Kenyan legislators to pass a law declaring that you are Kenyan instead of American, it wouldn't cause your American citizenship to be revoked—because Kenyan law does not apply to the United states.


xcott
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 6:48 pm

So if I pay an Indonesian dude to adopt you in absentia, and file all the appropriate paperwork in Indonesia, you'll suddenly cease to be a US citizen?

No, only US law determines US citizenship, and the only way to lose US citizenship is to personally renounce it.


BO the BFer
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 8:04 pm

Barney Frank enjoys your deviated rectum.


Anthony
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 8:38 pm

See the problem is that those who believe in the birther conspiracy theory attempt to pretend that they are being reasonable. They say things such as “why doesn't he just produce” his birth certificate, long form or something like that. They pretend that their question are those of a person who is really concerned about getting to the truth. It is the state of Hawaii that keeps the records of who has a Hawaiian birth certificate. That is one of its responsibilities. Jusriticition is Canada, Mexico, Austria, Japan, and many others (including America) keep the official records of births of their citizens.

So, stop pretending that you are being a reasonable person asking a honest question. The answers have been given, and this doesn't change the fact that you are just lying.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:02 pm

Wrong from beginning to end. Have you had your meds adjusted? You sound liked you're having a rather nasty manic attack, I'm afraid.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:07 pm

The original vital records ARE the birth certificate, as anyone with a brain knows. Go back to Birtherstan, troll.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:10 pm

Maybe you and your dear friend Jeanniemac are both paranoid idiots. Good God, life is not a Tom Clancy novel!


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:12 pm

No, he said he saw it as a child *among his family's papers.* There's a big difference.


Name
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:13 pm

While it is true many countries and states keep official records of births, Obama himself said he had his birth certificate among his papers. If so, how can it be in the Hawaiian vault? Many people have their birth certificates and use them to obtain other documents. The answer has not been given. A computer generated “Certification of live birth” is not a birth certificate.
Why would you say I am lying? About what?
Obama could shut up all the birth certificate controversy by simply producing his birth certificate which he has among his papers.
The controversy rages because there must be some reason he is refusing to show it.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:13 pm

Hi, Mrs. Red! What school of rhetoric did you attend that you find your husband's nonsensical cut and paste jobs “very eloquent”? I'd like to know so I can avoid it.


Name
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:18 pm

We know that Obama has a birth certificate. He tells us so, in “Dreams…”

“I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school. It's a short piece, with a photograph of him. No mention is made of my mother or me, and I'm left to wonder whether the omission was intentional on my father's part, in anticipation of his long departure. Perhaps the reporter failed to ask personal questions, intimidated by my father's imperious manner; or perhaps it was an editorial decision, not part of the simple story that they were looking for. I wonder, too, whether the omission caused a fight between my parents.”

From the text of “Dreams…” (Pg. 26 last paragraph)


libh8er
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 9:41 pm

You know Anthony, I don't care where he was born. Obviously, he may have hatched under a rock. But when people hide all of their school writings, and publications that should be public record, makes you kind of wonder. At least it makes a lot of us wonder. I don't think it is too much to ask of “our” president. Some of us prefer to bury our heads in the sand and believe what we want.


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:29 pm

Hi, Jeanniemac! Can you show us where the President wrote that the birth certificate was an original hospital copy, complete with a footprint and his height and weight and the doctor's name and all the completely irrelevant trivia that you birthers seem to think is more important than the seal of the state of Hawaii, a serial number from the state of Hawaii, a statement on the Department of Health web site of the State of Hawaii, and public statements from highly placed Republican officials of the State of Hawaii?

Thanks!


ellid
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:31 pm

Lady, he already did. It's on the Internet. Has been since the summer of 2008.

As for you, if you're so stupid that you don't realize that ORIGINAL birth records are kept by the state that issues them and the nice little piece of paper that the hospital sends home with mommy and daddy and baby is a souvenir with no legal validity, then you are hopeless. Just hopeless.


Your Dead Mother
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:45 pm

Lovely.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:51 pm

You're funny. And a bigoted idiot and you have no say.

The electoral college agreed the Majority. The other 320,000,000 million?

No. You're a handful of sick fucks headed for federal prison like your messiah, James Von Brunn.

You are such an idiot.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:52 pm

You also are too stupid to realize that you have an IP address.


Obvious
Comment posted January 5, 2010 @ 10:54 pm

When did you press Bush about his alleged military record, bigot?


Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls … | Obama Snafu
Pingback posted January 5, 2010 @ 11:03 pm

[...] post: Glenn Beck Accuses Liberals of Coordinating Birther Phone Calls … Tags: accuses, Congress, conspiracy, glenn beck, Hawai, Obama, president, STATE No [...]


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:00 am

No, you are the one who feels threatened. Just accept the facts, and stop this poorly thought out disillusioned of yours.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:07 am

The reason for that is no respectable journalist or news agency would like to be associated with a conspiracy theory. It damages journalistic integrity, but as a person who is clinging to a disillusioned position you wouldn't understand this.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:15 am

Are you making that up or are you just confused? Glenn Beck is the biggest conspiracy nut when it comes to Obama. Beck even tried to argue that Obama hates white people, which obviously has nothing to with policies.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:28 am

1. Born on American Soil. American citizen, irrelevant of the nationality of ones parents.
2. The State of Hawaii has the original birth certificate. The is nothing that suggests otherwise.
3. When a child's parent re-marries their spouse automatically become a guardian to the child. No adoption papers need.
4. No evidence that Obama ever obtained Indonesian citizenship. Most countries require atleast 5 years, and have very complicated processes to become a citizen.
5. You can remain under siege in your parents basement waiting for the end of the world. Just don't forget the koolaid and water.
6. Never so that coming. That is right Barry White doesn't care about you.
7. I think you are a little confused. You rambling about nonsense and never produced evidence to support you position.

You are funny.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:45 am

Aw. Are you confused. One concern that Judge Carter had was Orly Taitz supports continuously calling his court. That behavior seems more like trying to influence the court, and the frequency increases concerns.

The comment that you attempted to reply to does question the original poster's state of mine. It did indicate the the statement made was factually false, and that the original poster arguments are silly. Yes, idiot my have been harsh, but it is a correct depiction.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:51 am

An ordinary citizens has no rights to another citizens vital records unless there is some legal reason to have access to those records. The most general case is that of a family member or someone responsible for that citizen's estate. Other situation are those of where a person has legal standing.

The Hawaiian Health Director is responsible for the integrity of the vital records, and that is the reason we must accept her words as fact.

Keep stinking down that rabbit, don't worry you will never hit bottom.


RedGraham
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:53 am

Top radio hosts, including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Mark Levin and Lou Dobbs, have all said unequivocally and publicly that the Obama eligibility issue is legitimate and worthy. Still no Birth Certificate, except the Kenyan one, his father was a “transient alien” Brit married to the underage mother. He was adopted as Indonesian-Moslem Barry Soetoro, attended college as a Foreign Student, visited Pakistan on unknown visa, travelled a few times to Kenya as a young man(perhaps to renew his citizenship?). And he has already paid well-over a million dollars to cover this stuff up. Without the original BC he mentions “looking at” in 'Dreams of My Father' on page 26 and those college records he is a man without a country. The king is not wearing any clothes.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:59 am

For bithers it is a hard concept for them to understand that citizens and visitor in a specific jurisdiction are responsible for abiding to that jurisdiction's laws. Also, that the country that a citizen is in the “has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance,” and the citizen owes allegiance to that country.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:07 am

If an issuing office such as the Hawaiian Department of Health issues a birth certificate, then it is a birth certificate. When the quality of computers all birth certificates are generated by computers.

Why should Obama release anything? Birthers are calling the person responsible for ensuring the integrity of Hawaii's vital records a liar

This should have died when the Hawaii stated that they have the original records.

Now do you understand why we call you a liar. Everything you have typed is a fraud, and no one (including the president) will fall for it.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:15 am

Are you a moron or where you born that way. The passage is referring to an article not his birth certificate. From the passage the only thing that we know is that he had “a different” birth certificate at the time it was written than the one he produced.

That is one of the weakest arguments I have ever read.

Please, get a book on English writing.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:30 am

Wow. Then it must be hard to be you. Having to accept that Barak Obama is the president of U.S.A. must be very hard to deal with. It must be hard having to accept that he will only release information relating to the governing of America or statements relating to events around the world. It must be really hard to have to accept it.

Yes it you are correct you do “prefer to bury our heads in the sand and believe what” you want. Take your head out of the sand. Look at his “certification of live birth, which is available online, and ask yourself honest questions. I am not referring to the nonsense you typed, but genuine questions.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:34 am

Put your clothes back on you are no king or anything close.


RedGraham
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 3:05 am

Why has Obama employed a legion of private and Govt. attorneys to avoid
presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 7:07 am

You know that's not true.


morrisohman
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 7:55 am

Glenn Beck just proves what an Ahole that he is but that is nothing new.


novaman
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:18 am

ellid, you are simply mistaken. He has spent nearly $2M in campaign money alone, at Perkins & Cuie law firm, who represents him in the DOZENS of lawsuits around the country. He also has DoJ and DoD lawyers at some cases to defend his right to not have to prove his constitutional eligibility to hold the office of POTUS.

I won't provide the links to prove it because it is too simple to do a google search. So, look it up. Once you see I'm right, then what?


novaman
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:25 am

Article 2, Section 1, US constitution

This is a brief run down to explain. Please read it then what?
You said “You can't? Gee”. Well, I just did, in spades, so, now what?

Don't call me a bigot, a racist, a nuckledragger, a partisan or whatever. Just address the question/issue at hand.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:27 am

No, he spent the money on vetting Cabinet secretaries. The statement that he spent it defending nuisance suits is not true and never has been.


novaman
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:28 am

Sorry, forgot the link. Here it is.

http://www.uslaw.com/is_obama_natural_born_citizen


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:29 am

The President was born in Honolulu and meets all Constitutional requirements for office.

And whether or not you are actually a racist (probable) or a partisan (almost certainly), you can't spell “knuckledragger.” Pathetic.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:30 am

That's nice. Too bad it's wrong.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:47 am

I have heard various amount with the amounts always changing. Have you found out how much money he is spending on his lunch.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:51 am

Nice fake link. Did you also forget to check?


novaman
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 10:05 am

The fact remains that lawyers from Perkins Cuie have appeared before numerous judges representing Obama in these lawsuits. This is a matter of simple observation and public record.

Campaign fund expenditures are reported to the FEC, and their records show nearly $2m (I'm rounding) to Perkins Cuie.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 10:07 am

Why don't you realize that you are being mocked.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:57 am

Which represent monies spent vetting Cabinet appointees, among others.

*yawn*

Go knit for the troops. You will do your country more good than you are spamming the 'Net with this horse puckey.


edeldoug
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:59 am

http://starboard.blogtownhall.com/

Beck vs The Birthers: A Lesson for BOTH Sides


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 12:33 pm

Then why dosent Glen ot others report on the upcoming trail Jan, 26, 2010 in california, at least report on it you dont have to take a stand just report on it, also the treason trail in tennessee waiting on the grand jury indictment.


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:22 pm

There's no upcoming 'trail' nor is there an upcoming trial. Judge Carter dismissed the non-sense last October. As far as those 'grand jurys'. That's pretty laughable. They're comparable to a bunch of little kids playing court.


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:25 pm

Wow! I didn't know he had employed 'legions' of attorneys. I'd be willing to bet he's spent at least 5 billion just hiding the 'truth' by now.

Truth is, for those cases that have been dismissed, the court has required that the plaintiffs pay for Obama's defense – that is when the defense attorneys have asked for the fees.


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:29 pm

If we apply the provisions of logical and illogical law to the simple facts, which birthtards claim about Obama – though in truth the is publically available documentation to confirm the truth of these facts – the inescapable conclusion is that the birthtards have no logic and are now, still to this day, illogical idiots – aka retards.


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 1:39 pm

We will see.

________________________________


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:14 pm

So you are taking about the case that was dismissed by Judge Carter. When did you miss him fining Ms. Taitz $20,000 for filing “frivolous” lawsuits. Yes, that was his exact word “frivolous.”

You can go back playing in your rabbit hole.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:16 pm

What is there to see. The case has been dismissed. Are you that disillusioned or is it you don't understand what it means what dismissed means.


mantis
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:17 pm

I won't provide the links to prove it

Because you can't. Because it's bullshit.

Next birthtard please!


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:25 pm

It is really funny that Glenn Beck was correct on this one. The title of the article should be “a non-grass-roots analysis on why Beck was wrong.” Why you birthers keep on pretending to be reasonable.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:55 pm

The grand jury indictment isn't going to happen. Ditto the “trail” in California.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:56 pm

And we are supposed to see what? “Dismissed with prejudice” means that the case is over. Kaput. Done. Finished. It is an ex-case. It can *never* be revived. It is pushing up daisies. It has joined the choir invisible….


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 2:59 pm

maybe you read different sources than I , and my source writes that the jury trail is set to begin Jan 26 2010, so let's see who is right, Now don't call me any names because I dissagree with you.


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 3:04 pm

Plantiffs “amazingly overjoyed,” Judge David Carter has turned down the DOJ motion for Dismissal in the case of Barnett vs Obama.

This is a victory for democracy and the people of America, attorney Orly Taitz said.
This means that come January, the POTUS will be forced to come into this same courtroom and explain his fraud to the American peop… Read full article »


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 3:05 pm

Now show me where it was dismissed


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 3:56 pm

what is the matter , you can't find where it was dismissed, you were so quick to point out your left wing talking points.


Name
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 4:03 pm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter…


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 4:56 pm

Sorry, Name/John Tribuiano/whatever. Wrong.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/c…


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 4:58 pm

False: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/c…


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 5:07 pm

Your sources are WRONG. I never seen anyone so shit all stupid as you. You musta got manure for brains.


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 5:09 pm

That was like last summer and reported by WorldNetDaily incorrectly. Oily Taintz walked around in the streets with what she thought was a ruling from Carter that Obama would have to show up in her offices in 30 days. Well, she was WRONG. This case is dead. Dismissed with prejudice.


NOT_AXJ
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 5:11 pm

As Name probably posted above… Here's the actual ruling and it ain't real pretty when it comes to the language he used to described Orly's Taitz and her court room antics.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter…


TheSaneOne
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 5:27 pm

Orly's problem was that the court did the routine setting of trial dates, etc., since the ruling on whether to dismiss hadn't been made. They always do this, so it means nothing. But Orly kept raving about how it meant it was going to trial. Just example of her lack of understanding of legal matters and procedure….


Anonymous
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:04 pm

jeaniemac, President Obama won’t, as you say, “produce the damn thing, and shut up the birthers” because he does not give a rats ass about you birfers or what you think, cause you’re nuts, and the majority of America makes fun of you birfers…..we are not sitting around wanting you to shut up……you’re much too entertaining……..


Anonymous
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:08 pm

after you, libh8er……..after you…..say something intelligent, that is……


Anonymous
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:12 pm

…and that sound we all just heard was davidgoliath’s head exploding……and he’s so ssccaaarrrrrrred!!! Big Bad President Obama is in office and when I say remove him, no one will listen and do it……..wah, wah, wah………!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


jayhg
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 6:20 pm

novaman……only $2 million??? I thought you birfers said it was $4 million……or what that $6 million, or $9 hundred thousaid……or…..I just can't keep up with it. Maybe tomorrow's number will come with some explanation and facts, but somehow, I doubt it………


jayhg
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 6:27 pm

WOOOO WEEEE……johntribuiano is a realllll crazy birfer and he must have just come up for some air from his mother's basement or attic or somewhere, cause even the most rabid birfers are done with the “January 26, 2010 Trial thing.” Orly silly case was dismissed Oct. 29, john……by yall's hero, Judge Carter who was supposed to “let my people go” from the Big Bad President Barack Obama.

That Tennessee grand jury stuff is also stupid, but this is wasting my energy typing this cause johntribuiano is just plain crazy…….


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 7:46 pm

Just take the time and look for the ruling. It has been “dismissed with prejudice.” It is over, done, finished, end. If you don't take the time to do the research then people will express what they think of you.

If you listen to that sound ” “, you will realize that it is silence. The exact sound that you will hear on the 26th.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 7:54 pm

Are you disillusioned or something. Plantiffs were not overjoyed, they were pissed. So upset that after one of Ms. Taitz to tirades Judge Carter asked her explain why he should fine her $10,000. She continued her nonsense, and was able to get the fine raised to $20,000.

Yep, your comment read like the preemptive nonsense a couple of days before the case was dismissed.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 8:03 pm

Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed

http://washingtonindependent.com/65703/orly-tai…

Don't bother reading it, and keep to your disillusion.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 8:07 pm

When someone wants to avoid the talking points that do independent research. Trust me it isn't that hard. Try it.

All cases have been dismissed. Most appeals have been dismissed. A sanction have been levied (Taitz is appealing the sanction). Let us just say it is over.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 8:23 pm

My mistake it was Judge Land who imposed the fine, not Judge Carter.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 8:29 pm

My mistake it was Judge Land who imposed the fine, not Judge Carter. So I will correct my comment.

Are you disillusioned or something. The plaintiffs were not over, they were pissed. On an unrelated case their behavior has been very bad. So bad that Judge Land requested Ms. Taitz to explain why he should sanction her $10,000. This didn't curb her nonsense, and sanction was raised to $20,000.

Yep, your comment reads like the preemptive nonsense a couple of days before the case was dismissed.


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:22 pm

After all your BS I can not believe you admited your mistake. Let's talk about the California case, the one your are talking about the Judge is so far left you cant see him. This judge is a MARINE a real man not subject to intimidation.

________________________________


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

So after many people rebutted you, you question my credibility.

What is the same about Judge Carter and Judge Land? They both dismissed birther lawsuits. Yes, they both did. Also, none, not even one birther lawsuit has gone to trail.

It isn't hard to get the judges mixed up after so many birther law suits have been dismissed.


ellid
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:31 pm

Um, Johnny-boy (or whatever your name is)? The case was dismissed with prejudice. That means it can't ever be filed again. For any reason. There will be no hearing on January 26, 2010, or any other day of any other year.

It's over. Deal with it.


johntribuiano
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:38 pm

Jan 26, 2010  California, just wait and see then run your mouth. I'm outa here.

________________________________


Anthony
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 2:41 am

Birthers refuse to look at fact, and instead engage in conjecture based on their disappointment of losing an election.

It is interesting to learn that confirmation of the birth certificate was released from the governors office. Thanks for the link.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 9:49 pm

What don't you understand about case dismissed.

On page 30. The last page it reads

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 29, 2009″

Trust me it isn't that hard to understand.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter…

You can wait until Jan 27, 2010, the next day, the day after that. Nothing will change the case has been dismissed.

I will make you one promise. I will ask you about the case on January 27th. Then I want you to admit you are wrong and always have been.


chrisjay
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 10:22 pm

Come on back on 1/26 so you can do and endzone boogie all over our snarky smirks, johnny: k?
LOL
Birfers are so freakin' hilarious


TOM MADISON
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 10:59 pm

Lefties are still using the lame Alinsky ridicule tactic.


euphgeek
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 4:08 am

“Birthers refuse to look at fact, and instead engage in conjecture based on their disappointment of losing an election.”

That and blatant racism. You never saw anyone asking for the “long form” birth certificate of a white president.

“It is interesting to learn that confirmation of the birth certificate was released from the governors office. Thanks for the link.”

No problem. You can find those links in most of my responses to the nirthers that post here.


Anthony
Comment posted January 6, 2010 @ 11:17 pm

Ridicule tactics. What are you taking about?

Those pushing the birther conspiracy theory are being called out for their nonsense from people on the left, right and center.

How show people be treated when they push the same conspiracy theory when it was debunked about a year and a half?

Should they be patted on the back and told that they are asking legitimate questions, even though those questions have been already answered?

Should they be told it is okay to believe that they will be a trail date of a case that has been dismissed?

Should they be told it is okay to believe in a legal principle that is wrong?

Should they be told it is okay to believe that it is okay to make facts up?

Should they be told that it is okay to use a known and obvious forgery to support their arguments?

Should they be told it is okay not to do their own research, but just believe what ever they hear?

There is no ridicule happening. We have people who believe in something that is categorically false. No matter how you look at it, it is false. No this isn't a matter of a difference in opinion.

It is dishonest to continue sticking to a position which has been proven to be wrong.

It is dishonest to stick to a position when their is nothing to support that position.

So, unless you are more clear we will never know what you mean by “ridicule.”


MichelleM
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 1:52 am

Is that you Red? Keyes4Prez?


Anthony
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 2:13 am

It could be johntribuiano, who earlier said “I'm outa here.”


ellid
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 10:14 am

Please explain how refusing to accept birther nonsense about forged birth certificates and the relevance of dead Swiss philosophers equals “lame Alinsky ridicule tactic.” Seeking the facts should be something everyone can agree on.


chrisjay
Comment posted January 7, 2010 @ 3:51 pm

I am an autodidact:
I taught myself how to ridicule birfers & carny freaks without formal training of any kind. Requires only an exotic sense of humor to glean the comic value from you tinfoil-hatters.


AmericanGrandJury.org is run by the Chinese! « TarsTarkas.NET Blog
Pingback posted January 7, 2010 @ 7:34 pm

[...] actually Beck immediately accused “the liberals” of putting together an effort to Punk him on his own call in show, because of course there [...]


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 2:18 pm

You're a dumbass.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 2:19 pm

Juries don't have trails. Illiterate dumbass.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 2:20 pm

No, you're still a dumbass.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 2:21 pm

Where's your proof, you paranoid, lying sack of shit?


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 9, 2010 @ 7:23 pm

I will accuse you of incestuous rape and demand that you can’t hire legal counsel.

Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, idiot.


Birfers Are Idiots
Comment posted January 10, 2010 @ 10:00 am

“Lefties”
Another bigot.


Birfers Are Idiots
Comment posted January 10, 2010 @ 10:01 am

Dumbass.


kailuagirl
Comment posted January 11, 2010 @ 7:15 pm

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/10/red-flags-
BECK….??? FOX….??? are in question as long as they continue to cover-up the truth about the giant elephant sitting smack dab in everybody's living room every day and night, along with the rest of the MSM. 98% of media and news in the US is sourced back to 5 major corporations, all of which have dominate ownership outside of the USA. Think about this the next time you rave about BECK or FOX, or any of the slime that work for/with the MSM and that call themselves loyal US citizens. No such thing. Who LIES? THEY LIE. Facts can't be disputed, crystal clear cover-up.
Question???
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/10/red-flags-


ellid
Comment posted January 12, 2010 @ 9:43 am

Could you possibly produce the original English text of this instead of the result of running it through a Google translator into Choctaw and then re-translating the Choctaw into English? Thanks!


Robert
Comment posted January 12, 2010 @ 2:18 pm

Here is the reason that Obama needs to substantially prove to the people that he has met the Constitution's natural born citizen requirement to be President:

The President of the United States is one of the three branches of government. He is the Executive branch. The nation speaks to all people through one voice, the President's. The President can make treaties, grant pardons, sign and veto legislation, appoint a Cabinet, as well as Supreme Court Justices. In addition to these duties, the President knows the nation's most important and secure secrets, and as the Commander in Chief of the military, has the military's nuclear launch codes at the ready, and who can arguably, either take steps to weaken the nation, or even destroy it. In the words of Vice President Dick Cheney, “The president of the United States now for 50 years is followed at all times, 24 hours a day, by a military aide carrying a football that contains the nuclear codes that he would use and be authorized to use in the event of a nuclear attack on the United States. He could launch the kind of devastating attack the world has never seen. He doesn't have to check with anybody. He doesn't have to call the Congress. He doesn't have to check with the courts. He has that authority because of the nature of the world we live in.” (copied with permission from birther.com)


ellid
Comment posted January 12, 2010 @ 3:28 pm

Thank you for the lesson in middle school civics. Now go back to Birtherstan, little troll, and leave the grown ups alone.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 1:42 am

White House has confirmed that a member of Congress formally has requested that President Obama document information regarding his birth and, therefore, his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageI…


ellid
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 7:51 am

And this is news why? It's been extensively reported here and elsewhere. Are you really so badly informed that your major news source is a propaganda rag like WND?


ellid
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 8:05 am

Oh, here's the whole text of Jim Galloway's blog from five days ago. It was only half the entry, the rest of which was concerned with Nathan Deal's fundraising and attempts to manipulate the designation of water sources near Atlanta:

“9:36 am January 8, 2010, by Jim Galloway

The White House on Thursday [THAT IS, ON JANUARY 7, OR SIX DEALS BEFORE WND NOTICED IT] confirmed receipt of a letter from U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal that formally asks Barack Obama to address questions about his place of birth – and thus, whether he is qualified to be president.

The letter arrived Dec. 10. Beyond that, no one is willing to say much.

According to my AJC colleague Bob Keefe in Washington, Todd Smith, Deal’s chief of staff, likewise confirmed that the letter had been sent. But neither Smith nor his boss would comment on its content.

“[Deal] just did what he said he was going to do,” Smith said. “It’s not news.”

Likewise, White House spokeswoman Gannet Tseggai – while acknowledging receipt of Deal’s letter, declined to release a copy or discuss its content, saying that the issue of Obama’s birth has been addressed repeatedly.

In June 2008, Obama’s campaign office released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate — a “certification of live birth” — that shows he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961. Government officials in Hawaii have verified that the document is official, as have several news organizations.

Nonetheless, Deal – a Republican candidate for governor — said in November he would ask the president to prove he was an American-born citizen and therefore legally serving as president.

In an interview at the time, Deal said he has “no reason to think” that Obama is not a legal citizen – but added that questions raised by so-called “birthers” about Obama’s nationality warrant more proof.

“I have looked at the documentation that is publicly available and it leaves many things to be desired,” Deal said in November.

After declining to respond to numerous phone calls and e-mails seeking comment, Smith finally addressed the letter during a brief interview at Deal’s Washington office on Thursday.

He declined to provide a copy, saying it was out of deference to the president.”

Selective quoting (and linking to a “blog post” that is actually an ad for a Blackberry) seems to be WND's stock in trade. The actual blog post isn't nearly as inflammatory as Joseph “I hounded Vincent Foster to his death” Farah thinks it is…but of course our dear friend NC once again shows that s/he can't tell the difference between propaganda and real news. Not a surprise.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 2:04 pm

Why are you writing novels about a non-issue, LOL!!!

“I have looked at the documentation that is publicly available and it leaves many things to be desired,” Deal said in November.

This is all you need to know. A member of Congress thinks that information given to do public about Obama's birthplace is not sufficient.


chrisjay
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 2:08 pm

“copied with permission from birther.com”

Good lord, you Birfers are a virtually bottomless well of free comedic entertainment—–laughter is good for your health, so for that I thank you!


chrisjay
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 2:09 pm

White House has confirmed that Obama is indeed POTUS but, alas, that he is STILL black


ellid
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 2:15 pm

Since you clearly flunked this part of your citizenship exam, old sport, let me spell it out for you:

In America, we think for ourselves instead of parroting what others tell us. Not everyone has the same opinion, which is why we vote for our Congressional representatives. A good citizen will read as much about an issue as possible before making a decision, instead of taking one source's word for it.

That's why I reproduced the actual blog entry that Mr. Galloway wrote instead of taking a single line out of context the way WND did. And after due consideration, and reading everything I could find about Mr. Galloway's blog entry, and Representative Nathan Deal's request, I have reached the following conclusion:

I don't give a gangrenous rat's ass about Nathan Deal's ridiculous attempt to undermine the Presidency.

See? Isn't that simple? I feel so very sorry for you, coming from a country where the common folk (do they call them “peasants” in your homeland? Peons? Slaves?) must believe whatever their leaders tell them. Truly, you have much to learn about how we do things in America.

LOL.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 4:54 pm

LOL, You are the one who follows the directions from the “dear leader” and his media clowns.

What is the big deal to produce the original birth certificate?


ellid
Comment posted January 13, 2010 @ 9:32 pm

Wrong again! But then again, I was born and raised in a free society, where we elect our leaders and think for ourselves.

And you know what? I think you're a sad, sad little Communist at heart who's so traumatic by your upbringing in Moldova or some other benighted place that you literally can't imagine a country where leaders are freely elected by the people.

*pats on head*

Poor ickle baby-boo. Have some nice-ums num-nums and you'll feel better in the morning until you find out that the SCARY SCARY BLACK MAN is still President.

Also, LOL


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 2:12 am

Growing up in a communist country gave me an advantage over you in the ability to detect a communist BS propaganda. Ridiculing opponents using the media is just one of the tactics used.

How do you know that Obama's COLB contains a state seal and valid ID number when DoH would not stand behind it and say so. There have been cases of document fraud involving COLB documents in the USA:
http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/press/files/ande…

“…As part of the investigation, federal agents executed a search warrant of the HCOVS on Feb. 18, 2004, which resulted in the seizure of hundreds of suspect Certificates of Live Birth which falsely indicated that the named individuals were born in Jersey City, when in fact, they were born outside the United States and were in the United States illegally….”

Why is it a big deal for Obama to produce the original birth certificate?


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 7:27 am

For the sixtieth or seventieth time, HE ALREADY PRODUCED HIS LEGAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE, YOU IDIOT.

Also, thank you for finally confirming that you are indeed Orly Taitz. Tell me, was Charles Lincoln worth the embarrassment and trouble at home?


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 7:29 am

Also, a document ring producing false papers for illegal immigrants has nothing to do with the President, and you know it. Go back to drilling teeth, and hire a real lawyer, with a real degree and some actual knowledge of the law, to defend your malpractice suits.


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 10:40 am

The citation http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/press/files/ande… provides evidence that birth certificates can be obtained by fraud. A legitimate summary of a fraudulent document is not worth the paper it is written on. Obama's Certification of Live Birth is a summary of his 1961 vital record on file with the state of Hawaii's DOH. All any of the birther's want to see is this original document to determine if it too, is legitimate. Spend $20 to produce it, and the birthers will go away.

The way I see it, birthers want examine the evidence, and the Obama followers want to suppress that same evidence. So much for a free (and “transparent”) society.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 11:58 am

Once again, there is zero connection between a fraudulent birth certificate ring in New Jersey a couple of years ago and the President's birth in Hawaii being corroborated by two contemporary birth announcements, verification by several highly placed state officials, and the actual state-issued birth certificate.

Go home, birther. You're wrong, and your unpatriotic hair splitting is very, very annoying.


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 12:02 pm

These two citations –

Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, “Birth Certificate Fraud” http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf

United States Department of Justice press release http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/press/files/ande…

provide additional evidence that birth certificates can be obtained by fraud. A legitimate summary of a fraudulent document is not worth the paper it is written on.

Obama's Certification of Live Birth is a summary of his 1961 vital record on file with the state of Hawaii's DOH. All any of the birther's want to see is this original document to determine if it too, is legitimate. Spend $20 to produce it, and the birthers will go away.

The way I see it, birthers want examine the evidence, and the Obama followers want to suppress that same evidence. So much for a free (and “transparent”) society.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 1:12 pm

Your obsession with Orly is fascinating.
How many people from former communist countries have immigrated to USA: only one?

What happened with your English comprehension ability: the New Jersey story was about state issuing genuine birth certificates based on data planted into vital statistics records by a corrupt official. No fake documents were given to illegals – state issued them valid documents.

In Obama's case we don't even know whether DoH issued COLB on June 6, 2007.

The misleading and deceptive statments by Hawaii DoH officials indicate that something is wrong with Obama's birth certificate. Their behavior is not consistent with the official story about Kapiolani birth.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 1:21 pm

Image posted on a friendly web page is not a legal birth certificate.

Only Dr. Fukino made a statement that Obama was born in Hawaii. The question is – what did she use as a source for her statement: an amended birth certificate or the original one?

The rest of the gang is relying on a single source for their position. No need to have a giant conspiracy if people blindly believed Dr. Fukino.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 2:07 pm

It still doesn't have a damned thing to do with the President's birth certificate.

Give it up, Orly. We know it's you. Why don't you admit that you're wrong and go back to ruining people's teeth?


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 2:10 pm

“Gang”? Sorry, Orly, but here in the United States our duly elected, appointed, and sworn public officials are not a “gang.” They're called the “government.”

Stop pretending you're still in Moldova. This is America, where we laugh at conspiracy-minded little dentists who think that a diploma from an on-line “university” is the same thing as a real legal education.

LOL.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 2:13 pm

*pats the nice birther on the head*

Your “facts” are based on the erroneous assumption that there is a massive, almost fifty year old conspiracy. You are wrong, and if you think I'm going to risk infecting my computer with viruses from your nasty little website, you are mistaken.

Go find something useful to do, like give blood for the Haitians.


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 2:47 pm

The site is clean http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?s…

No one is talking about a fifty year old conspiracy. There are reports that someone found a birth announcement in an August 13, 1961 edition of the Honolulu Advertiser that read:

Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Klanianaole Hwy., son, Aug 4.

This announcement was not placed so he could one day run for president, obviously, but rather it was placed so Ann Dunham would have had documented evidence for immigration purposes should Barack's birthplace ever be called into question when he was younger.

The announcement could have also been automatically generated as a result of the issuance of any birth certificate.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:04 pm

I gave you enough information in the past to make it clear that I am not Orly – but you do not want to listen. If you feel empowered to ridicule her – why should I ruin your fantasy?


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:11 pm

To which 50 year old conspiracy are you referring? No one is claiming such a thing. Granted, there was a birth announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser, but that could have been automatically generated by the DOH back in 1961 as a matter of SOP. On the other hand, If Ann had placed the notice herself, then it is arguable that she did so not because she conspired with anyone to get BO into the White House some day, but rather for immigration purposes should his immigration status ever come into question.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:27 pm

You gave no information except that you were raised in a Communist country – just like Orly Taitz.

What I'm asking for is so simple, just a few documents. It's much less than you and your arrogant friends are demanding from the President. What's wrong? What are you hiding?

Put up or shut up.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:31 pm

It's a lot easier for me to believe that you are a semi-educated buffoon who cannot accept the plain truth than to believe that a heavily pregnant teenager would choose to fly 10,000 miles to give birth hundreds of miles from any of her in-laws, let alone her mother and father.

The “Barack Obama was born in Kenya and his birth certificate was faked” theory fails every test of logic, reason, and good sense.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:33 pm

And you have a nice bridge in Brooklyn to sell me, I'll bet. Or perhaps it's the news kiosk in Grand Central Station? Or the Statue of Liberty?

Sorry, old sport, but I prefer reality to your nice little fantasies.


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:46 pm

You do not attempt to rebut any of the arguments with a meaningful analysis. Your game plan is to ignore, redirect, and put down.


chrisjay
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:51 pm

nc, you are certainly authoritative in the field of fantasy


chrisjay
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 3:53 pm

“Obama's people” !!
A conspiracy under every doily & cushion, eh forseti?


forseti
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:09 pm

Pregnant women fly all the time. They've even given birth on a plane before. What is so difficult about believing that Ann flew to Kenya to see her mate's family, or to give birth in Kenya to please his family? Who is to say that she was not in Kenya weeks before Barack's birth, and then returned to the U.S with Barack, and then decided to get a birth certificate for him?

There is one easy way to put these theories to rest – Show us your birth certificate, or passport, or college records that might have foreigner based scholarships listed, or anything else that might add evidence of your birthplace. Oh wait, Obama has suppressed all of these records though the use of high-priced lawyers. What is he hiding?


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:30 pm

Only Dr. Fukino made a statement that Obama was born in Hawaii. The question is – what did she use as a source for her statement: an amended birth certificate or the original one.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:41 pm

Once again, wrong.

Give it up, Orly. You'd be better off trying to dig your way down to China.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:45 pm

Clearly you aren't related to a woman who'd ever given birth, or you'd know that women are prohibited from flying anytime near their due date. FAIL.

You also clearly aren't aware that flying from Hawaii to Kenya in 1961 was beyond the means of all but the well-off, which the newlywed Obamas certainly were not. FAIL.

Third, Barack Obama Sr. was not Stanley Dunham's “mate.” He was her husband. That you use a term more usually applied to animals is tasteless and verges on racism. FAIL.

The President's birth certificate was released over a year ago. That you insist on believing a ridiculous conspiracy theory shows only that you live in a fantasy world. FAIL.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:47 pm

You really expect me to believe the word of the webmaster of a birther web site?

BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 5:48 pm

I think that Judges Land and Clay have done a fine job of analyzing and debunking every single piece of shit on your web site. Why should I reinvent the wheel?


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 6:13 pm

I mentioned that I live close to Berkeley. Orly is in Southern California.

I am not running for president. Once Obama publishes his original birth certificate (just one document), I will post mine on this web site.


JohnC
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 6:32 pm

My response to naturalizedcitizen:

“Once Obama publishes his original birth certificate (just one document), I will post mine on this web site.”

But how would we know your “birth certificate” is not simply a forgery?


JohnC
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 7:08 pm

“Only Dr. Fukino made a statement that Obama was born in Hawaii. The question is – what did she use as a source for her statement: an amended birth certificate or the original one?”

You keep talking about an “amended” birth certificate. First, where is the evidence that Obama's birth certificate was amended?

Second, even if Obama's birth certificate has been amended, one can't simply just change the location of one's birth. Hawaii law enumerates the reasons for which a birth certificate can be amended:

§338-17.7 Establishment of new certificates of birth, when. (a) The department of health shall establish, in the following circumstances, a new certificate of birth for a person born in this State who already has a birth certificate filed with the department and who is referred to below as the “birth registrant”:

(1) Upon receipt of an affidavit of paternity, a court order establishing paternity, or a certificate of marriage establishing the marriage of the natural parents to each other, together with a request from the birth registrant, or the birth registrant’s parent or other person having legal custody of the birth registrant, that a new birth certificate be prepared because previously recorded information has been altered pursuant to law;

(2) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a final order, judgment, or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction that determined the nonexistence of a parent and child relationship between a person identified as a parent on the birth certificate on file and the birth registrant;

(3) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a final adoption decree, or of an abstract of the decree, pursuant to sections 338-20 and 578-14;

(4) Upon receipt of an affidavit of a physician that the physician has examined the birth registrant and has determined the following:

(A) The birth registrant’s sex designation was entered incorrectly on the birth registrant’s birth certificate; or

(B) The birth registrant has had a sex change operation and the sex designation on the birth registrant’s birth certificate is no longer correct; provided that the director of health may further investigate and require additional information that the director deems necessary; or

(5) Upon request of a law enforcement agency certifying that a new birth certificate showing different information would provide for the safety of the birth registrant; provided that the new birth certificate shall contain information requested by the law enforcement agency, shall be assigned a new number and filed accordingly, and shall not substitute for the birth registrant’s original birth certificate, which shall remain in place.

(b) When a new certificate of birth is established under this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth. Thereafter, the original certificate and the evidence supporting the preparation of the new certificate shall be sealed and filed. Such sealed document shall be opened only by an order of a court of record.

I don't see anything in those provisions that allows a person to amend the birth certificate to list a new birth location.


JohnC
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 7:24 pm

“The question is – what did she use as a source for her statement: an amended birth certificate or the original one?”

As a further response to your claim that Obama's birth certificate was amended, Hawaii law provides that the COLB is to reflect this fact:

§338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.

§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates. (a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been altered after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly “late” or “altered”.

Obama's COLB is not “distinctly” marked “altered” – it isn't maked “altered” at all. Therefore, if Hawaii law is any guide, the original birth certificate is not altered.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 7:58 pm

So you demand something of a stranger that you won't release yourself, eh? We have a word for that here in the United States:

HYPOCRITE.

Also, LOL.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

Even better: Forseti's website has all of four members besides himself.

To quote our dear friend NC/Orly:

LOL.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 8:25 pm

1. You assumed that the COLB presented by Obama is a genuine document issued by the DoH. We only have Joe Miller's word.

If Dr. Fukino can issue a press-release confirming Obama's birth in Hawaii and proclaim him a “natural-born American citizen”, she can also confirm that the COLB shown to the public by Obama is a genuine one.

2. Even if the COLB were a genuine one, the following scenario would have to be examined:

What was the source for original registration: Affidavit from a relative or report from the Kapiolani hospital?

If the first is true, a fake doctor's statement (an affidavit) could have been submitted after the initial birth registration as a suppporting document confirming the place of birth.

Strictly speaking this would not have been an amendment of the original (affidavit) birth registration, there would be no need to change the place of birth on COLB, you would only add a document to vital statistic records.
This could be the reason why Dr. Fukino used vital records (plural) as a basis for her statement about Obama's birth in Hawaii.

The solution is very simple: Let Kapiolani Hospital and DoH release the original birth registration record. If they match – Obama's birthplace is confirmed.

Otherwise,…what should be an acceptable punishment for the usurper-in-chief?

3. You provided many quotes from Hawaii law. How come there is no quote about the meaning of the 'Filed by Registrar” phrase?


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 8:40 pm

You could consider me a hypocryte only if I run for POTUS, asked other candidates to show the original birth certificate while hiding my own.

Logical thinking is not one of your strengths.


JohnC
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 8:55 pm

My response to naturalizedcitizen:

“1. You assumed that the COLB presented by Obama is a genuine document issued by the DoH. We only have Joe Miller's word.

If Dr. Fukino can issue a press-release confirming Obama's birth in Hawaii and proclaim him a “natural-born American citizen”, she can also confirm that the COLB shown to the public by Obama is a genuine one.”

I've said before, I think it's a slip-up, and a technical violation of Hawaii law as stated on the DoH's website, albeit one born out of frustration with the endless inane questions.

As to whether the COLB is legitimate or not, you seem to like to play a cat-and-mouse game. When the issue concerns the fact that the COLB states Obama was born on Oahu, your argument becomes: “Well, how do we know this is an official document?”

But when the issue concerns “accepted by” versus “filed by,” you then presume the document is valid, but keep asking Okubo why the document states “filed by.” You really should figure out what your main line of argument is: (1) The document is illegitimate, or (2) the document is legitimate but somehow indicates that Obama's birth was not properly registered.

“2. Even if the COLB were a genuine one, the following scenario would have to be examined:

What was the source for original registration: Affidavit from a relative or report from the Kapiolani hospital?”

What for? Either there is a vital record supporting the fact of his birth in Hawaii, or there isn't.

“If the first is true, a fake doctor's statement (an affidavit) could have been submitted after the initial birth registration as a suppporting document confirming the place of birth.”

So now we not only have perjury from the Dunhams, but perjury from a third-party “fake” doctor as well? The Dunhams must have enlisted some dedicated friends. The list of conspirators keeps getting longer and longer…

And again, this is not the same thing as evidence Obama wasn't born in Hawaii, so it turns out to be irrelevant to the larger questions at issue.

“Strictly speaking this would not have been an amendment of the original (affidavit) birth registration, there would be no need to change the place of birth on COLB, you would only add a document to vital statistic records.
This could be the reason why Dr. Fukino used vital records (plural) as a basis for her statement about Obama's birth in Hawaii.”

Not only is your hypothesis rather rich, but you're utilizing a strained interpretation of the common usage of the term “vital records.” Rarely do people refer to “vital record” unless they are specifically talking about a particular document. Otherwise, it is pretty much the rule that “vital records” is used in the plural sense. Don't believe me? Try googling “vital record” and see what you come up with.

“3. You provided many quotes from Hawaii law. How come there is no quote about the meaning of the 'Filed by Registrar” phrase?”

See my previous post. It contains extensive quotations of the HRS, where you can see how the words “file,” “filed,” and “filing” are used in the context of birth records. (I didn't even include similar references in the context of death records, but it gets redundant after a while.) There is simply no basis for the contention the Hawaii law provides for an intermediate stage between filing and registration.

The ball's in your court. Prove me wrong.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 8:56 pm

Would a newspaper announcement dated one day after the birth help? If I asked “factcheck.org” to authenticate it – would you accept it, LOL?

You could ask the birth hospital or the issuing authority to confirm it. You would have to travel to E. Europe to do it but, according to your own advice, a serious investigator would go to the source directly and ask questions.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 9:07 pm

Because the Registrar can't file something unless s/he has accepted it.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 9:09 pm

*holds up mirror*

YOU are the one who is making insane assumptions based on nothing but your own hatred and prejudice. You're also still a hypocrite. What are you hiding?


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 9:23 pm

I wish Dr. Fukino would “slip up” and confirm the COLB document as well.
Her press-release statement was not an accident – it was issued after consultation with AG Bennet. Either both of them are incompetent to do their job or covering for Obama – what is your pick?

I do not pretend to know the truth about Obama's birthplace. That is why you will not find me stating anything about it categorically. It is all speculation that could be ended in an instant – release the original document.

Vital records don't include only birth certificate, correct?
If that is the case why would you use this phrase instead of saying that the original birth certificate confirms birth in Hawaii? The use of phrase “vital records” allows Dr. Fukino wiggle room, she could be saying the truth and mislead the public at the same time. There could be additional document(s) on file that are used to support the claim of birth in Hawaii.

The DoH must provide the explanation about administrative rules when asked about it. Even if the explanation for”Filed By Registrar” was trivial, they cannot ignore the law and not respond to this question. The DoH behavior of not answering simple questions fuels the suspicion that they are covering for Obama.


ellid
Comment posted January 14, 2010 @ 11:22 pm

No, it wouldn't. How do we know you weren't born on the Moon and your mother or great-aunt simply bribed someone to send in the birth announcement to the paper?


ellid
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 7:01 am

And once again you don't address anything that JohnC said, and are splitting hairs to the point of absurdity. Pathetic.


forseti
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 12:07 pm

Ellid, you wrote: Even better: “Forseti's website has all of four members besides himself.”

My response: Are you one of these people who believe that if a lot of people subscribe to the same theory or belief then it must be true? Whether I have 4 members or 4,000 members is not relevant to the truth.

Elled, You wrote: “I think that Judges Land and Clay have done a fine job of analyzing and debunking every single piece of shit on your web site. Why should I reinvent the wheel?”

My response: Neither of these judges has analyzed any of the NBC issues. Cite where they did and I'll take a look at it.You also clearly aren't aware that flying from Hawaii to Kenya in 1961 was beyond the means of all but the well-off, which the newlywed Obamas certainly were not. FAIL.

Ellid, you wrote: “Clearly you aren't related to a woman who'd ever given birth, or you'd know that women are prohibited from flying anytime near their due date. FAIL.”You also clearly aren't aware that flying from Hawaii to Kenya in 1961 was beyond the means of all but the well-off, which the newlywed Obamas certainly were not. FAIL.

My response: You are right, and that is the reason people believe that Ann attempted to board a flight back to the US to give birth, but was prevented from doing so because of that pregnancy rule, and had to wait until after he was born to return to the U.S.

You wrote: “Third, Barack Obama Sr. was not Stanley Dunham's “mate.” He was her husband. That you use a term more usually applied to animals is tasteless and verges on racism. FAIL.”

M response: You fail using the facts, so you resort to playing the race card. Ever been to Australia, mate?

You wrote: “you also clearly aren't aware that flying from Hawaii to Kenya in 1961 was beyond the means of all but the well-off, which the newlywed Obamas certainly were not. FAIL.”

My response: “How do you know that?

You wrote: “The President's birth certificate was released over a year ago. That you insist on believing a ridiculous conspiracy theory shows only that you live in a fantasy”

My response: Obama released a summary of his 1961 vital record on file with the DOH. This summary document, although called an official birth certificate by Obama and the Hawaii DOH, only summarizes limited information from his 1961 vital record. It does not disclose which of the five or more procedures was used to prepare the original birth certificate. Each of these procedures has varying degrees of trustworthiness and reliability.

You wrote: “It's a lot easier for me to believe that you are a semi-educated buffoon…” I have a BA and a JD. What are your credntials?


ellid
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 1:07 pm

Why bother? It's already been done, repeatedly. You might want to read the decisions by Judge Land and Judge Carter, both of whom eviscerated your ridiculous argument.

As for you, if you really want to make a difference, donate to Haitian relief instead of wasting your time on trying to prove an impossibility. The President was born in Hawaii. He is natural born. You are wrong.


ellid
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 1:08 pm

Only in your sad little excuse for a brain.

LOL.


TRUTH
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 1:43 pm

DAVID WEIGEL is very obviously one of Obama's favorite paid liars and leg humping freaks, plus he's an absolutely pathetic excuse for a “journalist”. “Mister” Weigel, your ever growing fairy tales have become more predictable, more monotonous, and more boring than watching reruns of “Sanford and Son”. BTW, how are things going for you and TRACY RUSSO at DOJ, “ellid”? http://www.publiusforum.com/2009/10/07/the-obam… – The vast majority of Americans already know Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen”, the correct legal information can be found at this link : http://puzo1.blogspot.com/


TRUTH
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 1:45 pm

“ellid”, you are pathetically ignorant of the law.


chrisjay
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 1:52 pm

Some of your responses are beyond absurd, forseti
“ever been to Australia, mate?”—-we're supposed to take you seriously?

but for someone who claims to be college educated, the corker is your logic regarding the nature of 'truth' : your take on it sounds to me like it should be part of a religious sermon, not a discussion of facts and reality. I'm sure, in your heart you 'know' that Obama is a Kenyan Usurper, just as assuredly as our last president was told by God to invade Iraq.Rational adults are simply not persuaded by your 'faith' in your 'truth.


forseti
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 3:38 pm

I have yet to read any analysis of the facts by you or anyone else like you. The most important question here is what is any candidate's burden of proof that he meets the natural born citizen requirement to be President? Preponderance of the evidence. Clear and convincing evidence? Beyond a reasonable doubt? Pick one and we'll analyze it together.


naturalizedcitizen
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 4:25 pm

I use your “favorite” acronym as shorthand for: LO(bama)L


Jim
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 6:55 pm

Well, since he is in the WH now, it is up to you to provide the preponderance of evidence, clear and convincing, beyond a reasonable doubt, in order to remove him. Unless, of course, you don't really believe in our constitution and laws and just dislike a black man being our president.


forseti
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

I see you are playing the race card again. A summary of an unreliable and untrustworthy source wouldn't satisfy any of these burdens of proof. The burden of proof was on him. He was a Constitutional law professor; he knew that, He should not now get to benefit from any burden shifting.

Let's assume, arguendo, that the burden of proof now rests on people like me. Obama is suppressing all of the evidence reasonably calculated to lead to discoverable iinformation. That said, he is doing his best to obstruct everyone's efforts to get to the truth.

Oh, and once again, when people like you don't have the facts or law on your side, you play the race card.

I live in Oakland, where do you live?


Jim
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 8:04 pm

Well, since the courts are powerless to remove him, you have to follow the constitution. The only entity with that power is the House to draw up charges, and the Senate to hold a trial. Now, do you agree with that or are you just pissed that a black man is running our country? It's not a race card when that's all you have left, it's a fact.


forseti
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

You wrote: Now, do you agree with that or are you just pissed that a black man is running our
country?” This question is misleading as to form. Please rephrase it.

Article II Section 4 reads:

“The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and
misdemeanors.”

If the President has committed one or more of the above offenses, then yes, this section of the
Constitution must be followed. However, if it is discovered that Obama was not born in the U.S.,
and is not an NBC, then it is arguable that under the 20th Amendment, which reads, in part,
“…if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act
as President until a President shall have qualified…” SCOTUS could create a Marbury-type decision interpreting this to mean that his election, and everything that flowed from it, was void ab initio, as such, he never made it passed being a president-elect, so Biden is in. In case you haven't noticed, SCOTUS has a lot of power to create and craft their decisions any way they want.


Jim
Comment posted January 15, 2010 @ 10:23 pm

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Your misunderstanding of the Supreme Court is as remarkably stupid as your misunderstanding of the constitution. They will not touch it. They, more than you, respect the separation of powers. They can't remove a sitting president.


forseti
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 1:18 am

State your credentials.

There might not be any separation of powers issue because Obama's power could be held to be void ab initio. What would the court be infringing upon if it held that, but did not order him removed? Congress could still do its job then. Furthermore, if the leglislature has the power to address this issue regarding the executive branch, then arguably to prohibit the judicial branch from doing the same thing would be to upset the checks and balances of government by giving one branch more power over the other.

I've run across pople like you before. You laugh at opposing counsel, and then you stick your tail between your legs when the decision comes down against you. Legal minds like yours are a dime a dozen.

What I can tell you is, given the make-up of the Court, who knows how it will turn out.


Jim
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 1:25 am

Forseti: “Furthermore, if the leglislature has the power to address this issue regarding the executive branch, then arguably to prohibit the judicial branch from doing the same thing would be to upset the checks and balances of government by giving one branch more power over the other.”

So, basically what you're saying is that our forefathers didn't know what they were doing and you think the Judiciary should have more power than given to them by the constitution and take it away from the legislature…since that is expressly written into it. So, the constitution isn't important anymore to you.


Jim
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 1:33 am

Forseti: “State your credentials.”

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Well, I guess I'm the boss. One of many millions who went the polls and voted for many candidates for many offices, hired them to do a job. Now we have people like you who want to take that away with wild theories and baseless accusations. The boss ain't happy!


Palin4Prez
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 3:49 am

Obama mentions seeing his “Birth Certificate” on page 26 of 'Dreams of My Father'. Why won't he release THAT Birth Certificate? Unless it's from Kenya than I understand. Why not the college records unless he attended as a Foreign Student than I understand. On the face of the evidence that Obama Senior was a Kenyan-Brit/transient alien BHO cannot possibly meet the natural born citizen requirement of the Constitution. We need to put this imposter out on his ear ASAP.


forseti
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 10:13 am

Our forefathers wrote the NBC requirement into the Constitution because they did indeed know what they were doing. All of us “birther” people are trying to do is to get the government to follow its requirements. A summary Certification of Live Birth does not satisfy any of the three burdens of proof. As for your voting for Obama, voters cannot vote away sections of the Constitution. There is a process detailed in the Constitution to amend the it. Now, about the Supreme Court's power, they are the guardians and interpreters of the constitution (http://supremecourtus.gov/about/constitutional.pdf), so having them interpret the NBC clause and hold that he is or is not elegible to continue holding the office is right in line with their powers. That power would not interfere with Congress' power and duty to remove an unqualified President.


katahdin
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 10:24 am

There is still not a shred of evidence that Ann Dunham ever went to Kenya once in her entire life. The government of Kenya has stated she was never there. They have also stated that Barack Obama Sr. was out of the country between 1959 and 1967 continuously.
According to the 14th Amendment, Title 8 of the US Code, and over 100 years of settled law, anyone born inside the United States is a natural born, or native born, citizen (they are the same thing). The laws of a foreign country never take precedent over US laws, and certainly no foreign country can deprive a US citizen of his citizenship.
Ample evidence exists that President Obama was born in Hawaii. Officials of the state have unambiguously declared that he has a birth certificate on file with them that is genuine and in order.
All the birthers have on their side is speculation, fantasy, and deliberate misreadings of the law and the facts. The story of a young pregnant American girl flying to the other side of world, giving birth, then smuggling her baby back into the US would no doubt make compelling movie of the week, and it might make a good thriller for people to read on beach during their summer vacations, but reality is rarely as exciting.
The truth is simple. A young American girl went to college in Hawaii. She met and fell in love with a charming man from another country. They made a baby. They got married. She gave birth in the town where they lived, and where her parents also lived. The marriage didn't last, but the child that resulted from the union was much-loved– and a natural-born American citizen. See, it's simple. All the nonsense about secret journeys to and from Kenya, and a secret, unprovable Indonesian adoption is just a smokescreen thrown up by people who just can't accept the simple truth. Barack Hussein Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States of America, and he is our president.


Jim
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 1:39 pm

forseti: “This is my last post because it is pointless to argue with someone who feigns ignorance.”

Then I've done my job and made the board a better place. But, you'll be back…it's all you've got left.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 4:21 am

Honestly, please stop it. Are you really that disillusioned to believe anything that your wrote. The only people who believe that Obama isn’t a natural born citizen are those who disillusioned about an election loss. We call those people birthers, because they refuse to look at the facts. They refuse to accept a “Certification of Live Birth.” They refuse to acknowledge the state of Hawaii issuing to press releasing clearly stating Barak H. Obama is a natural born citizen of America. They enter in to word play, deceptions, misinformation and half truths.


Anthony
Comment posted January 16, 2010 @ 11:56 pm

So now you are admitting that you are actually a Communist spy. No wonder you are engaging in spreading lies. Well you aren't a good spy, are you.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 12:02 am

“Birth certificates can be obtained by fraud.” — Wow you must be really disillusioned. Barak H. Obama is what is considered a high profile. Another birther succeeding in undermining their arguments.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 5:06 am

Learn the meaning of “high profile.” Presidential candidates are high profile, thus there is a lot of scrutiny. Do you honestly believe that a rag tag disillusioned conspiracy theory nuts can do a better job that the State of Hawaii or any other federal, state agency. You are a moron.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 5:25 am

What is fail to realize is that newspapers actually confirm that the information is correct. This something that they still do today. Honestly, you make things up and just don’t see the problems with them.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 5:29 am

Do you honestly believe that the nonsense that you typed hasn’t been rebutted. Over 1 year has passed and you honestly believe your nonsense is original.

All cases and appeals that have been heard brought forward by birthers have been dismissed.

The State of Hawaii has release two statements confirming Obama’s citizenship.

Next time pick a hobby that has some place in reality.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 5:31 am

It was in 1961. What you are arguing is impossible. Even with today’s technology it would be impossible.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 5:34 am

Both statements where release from the Governor office and there was no mentions of amendment.

Honestly, people do do their own research.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 12:40 am

At one point people believed that the earth was flat. So what is your point. You can believe what ever you want to. When facts are presented that disputes your beliefs then are forced to abandon your believes. You have been shown over and over again that you believes are wrong, but you are insistent on clinging to them. That is your choice, but don't be offended if you are harshly rebutted.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 12:46 am

Are you honestly that disillusioned. Do you honestly believe that people who really what to know the facts wouldn't do research. You sir are a fraud. Instead of presenting arguments to support your position you attempt to smear someone. The topic of this article was published by many other places.

The question of the presidents citizenship was raised during the 2008 primary and was addressed them. He went on the to obtaining a historic victory and a clear victory in the presidential election. Thus, the comment “The vast majority of Americans already know Obama is not a natural born Citizen.” Is false, as it would have been impossible for your claim to be true and for him to win the election.

You seem more like a paid shill for Ms. Taitz or any of her associates.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 12:49 am

You are a pathetically ignorant of the law. Nothing have even been produced by those who believe in the birther conspiracy theory that is consistent with American law. The attempted distortion of American law doesn't count.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 12:59 am

Please explain the realize reason that you cling to this ridiculous conspiracy theory. Then and only then can we determine your real intentions. This conspiracy theory is the most stupid ever, and should have died over 2 years ago.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 1:21 am

The future doesn't undo the facts of the past. It really isn't a hard concept to understand. The president is a natural born citizen of America, and proven by his Certification of Live Birth as issued by the state of Hawaii.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 1:25 am

See what you still fail to realize is the problem is that you are making things up. You refuse to accept any proof that disproves your position, and produce nothing to support yours. Of course you will be laughed at in court, but your case will also be dismissed. Ask Ms. Taitz how it feels.


Anthony
Comment posted January 17, 2010 @ 1:40 am

As shown by his Certification of Live Birth as provided by the State of Hawaii, Barak H. Obama is a natural born citizen. End of story.


ellid
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 10:15 am

So?


ellid
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 10:16 am

Ah, it's Philip Berg! How nice to know that he's keeping his hand in!


ellid
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 10:21 am

O RLY?


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 11:56 am

Ask RedGraham, your prison roommate.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 11:58 am

Your concept of “vast majority” proves you're a deranged sociopath.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 11:59 am

Liar. Show credible proof or STFU.


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 12:03 pm

No race card necessary. I'm playing the “you're an arrogant, deranged psychopath with more spare time than common sense with pathetic delusions of grandeur and zero credibility and zero authority” card.

Prove evidence suppression.
Prove that the burden of proof in a civil case is on the defendant.
Prove you're not a drooling idiot desperate for attention.

You're a flaming idiot and only mildly entertaining.


ellid
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 12:39 pm

*cheers at the good news*


ellid
Comment posted January 18, 2010 @ 4:58 pm

“My response: I have a BA and a JD. What are your credentials?”

My response:

I'm very sorry to tell you this, but the “certificates” one finds in boxes of cereal are not actually college degrees. They're advertising premiums, and they won't get you very far in this life.


alltheanswers
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 12:09 am

I didn't want to do this but,you people have ticked me off:

I'm now predicting a Haitian type disaster for Hawaii.In the chaos to follow,a team from the National Enquirer will be able to obtain the goods on Obama,just as they did on Edwards and Tiger.

I'm from Hudson County,the home of Hal Turner.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 8:09 am

Are you talking about the usurper in the White House?


ellid
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 7:17 am

How nice, that you wish disaster on an entire state of people to satisfy your selfish desires. What a vile, vile person you must be.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 12:29 pm

This is a democracy. We don’t have monarchs, or thrones to usurp. We *do* have a President, who was elected and sworn in accordance with our Constitution.

Learn your citizenship lessons or go home. America does not need ignorant fools like you.


JohnC
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 6:19 pm

“Are you talking about the usurper in the White House?”

In the words of President Reagan – there you go again.


JohnC
Comment posted January 19, 2010 @ 6:19 pm

“Are you talking about the usurper in the White House?”

In the words of President Reagan – there you go again.


Palin4Prez
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 1:21 am

There have already been dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in excess of $1.7 million to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.
Among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records. We must put this madman monster out on his ear ASAP.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 7:16 am

He also said the following:
Trust but verify!


Anonymous
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 7:16 am

He also said the following:
Trust but verify!


Anonymous
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 7:38 am

Sorry for using the word “usurp” instead of “coup d’etat”.

A citizenship lesson: Government Flow Chart
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2431047/posts?page=9#9


Anonymous
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 7:38 am

Sorry for using the word “usurp” instead of “coup d’etat”.

A citizenship lesson: Government Flow Chart
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2431047/posts?page=9#9


ellid
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 7:37 am

Who'd you plagiarize from this time, Gunny?


Anonymous
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 2:55 pm

Sorry, but a coup involves the armed overthrow of a government, usually by a group of military officers. None of that happened last year.

As for the Freepers, didn’t your mama back behind the Iron Curtain tell you not to pay attention to the monkeys at the bottom of the barrel?


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 12:27 pm

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai?i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 12:29 pm

It's from Gary Kreep. Appropriate name for a birfer.

Most birfer droolers can't think for themselves. They are a vile, lying, cowardly, pathetic bunch who don't deserve to live in the U.S.


ellid
Comment posted January 20, 2010 @ 1:55 pm

I was wondering, since the style and argument of his cut and paste jobs change every few days. Thanks.


Anthony
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 6:28 am

Some people seem to be fools, then they open their mouths and prove how foolish they really are. You are a fool.


Anthony
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 11:39 am

Are you having a problem following the conversation. You are not in the White House. You are even more disillusioned that I thought your were.


Anthony
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 7:05 am

forseti: “response: I have a BA and a JD.”

You have a 'biased anxiety' and a 'juvenile disillusion.' That is obvious. It was easy to guess.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 8:44 pm

Don’t embarass yourself with posts like the previous one.

You see, both JohnC and Ellid knew what I was referring to.

Ask for clarification if you are confused about other people’s posts. You may learn something in the process.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 9:41 pm

You’re still misusing “usurper.” And you’re still wrong about the President.


Anthony
Comment posted January 22, 2010 @ 11:20 am

You stated that you grew up in a communist country. Thus it is easy to conclude that you are a communist, may be even Orly Taitz. With addition to that you are a communist spy who hasn’t realized that the cold war is over.


Anthony
Comment posted January 22, 2010 @ 11:22 am

I think it is Orly Taitz. No other birther has openly claimed to have live in a communist country.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 22, 2010 @ 9:56 pm

According to your generalization logic only Christian Democrats live in the USA.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 22, 2010 @ 10:28 pm

There is no such political party in the United States. Are you now claiming to be from East Germany?


Anthony
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 1:27 am

No I actually believe that Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians, Environmentalist, Christians, Jew, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists and many more political/religious
groups live in the good old USA.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 3:24 am

Why are you willing to make a GENERALIZATION about a communist country that you are not willing to extend to the example of USA?

Is it possible that non-communists lived in a communist country?


Anonymous
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 3:30 am

No, I grew up closer to Moldova, LOL.


Anthony
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 3:47 am

No, the claim that is being made is that you are a communist spy.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 2:38 pm

Actually I thought you were from Lower Slobbovia, which is near Cretinia-Idiotia.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 23, 2010 @ 2:39 pm

No doubt. Still, there is no party called the “Christian Democrats” in the United States and never has been. Unlike Europe, we don’t have religiously-based political parties.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 24, 2010 @ 1:47 pm

And he thought ketchup was a vegetable and joked about bombing Russia. Your point?


Anonymous
Comment posted January 24, 2010 @ 11:49 pm

OK. you win.


Anonymous
Comment posted January 25, 2010 @ 12:31 pm

Does this mean you’re finally going to shut up and go away? Or do something useful, like give blood for the earthquake victims in Haiti?


jayhg
Comment posted January 25, 2010 @ 7:59 pm

Jim, forseti is not feigning….


Make The Pie Higher
Comment posted January 26, 2010 @ 1:38 pm

You've already proven you're an idiot with a much more likely chance of winding up in federal prison.


Irish_Wake
Comment posted January 31, 2010 @ 7:11 pm

Got to correct that $1.7 mil error. Can't let incorrect math corrupt the incorrect thinking process.

A case filed by one of the most prolific birther litigants, Philip J. Berg, went all the way up to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. In November the court dismissed the appeal and ordered Berg to pay the legal costs for the defendants, which included the Federal Election Commission. Here was the government's big chance to recoup its millions. But when the FEC submitted its bill, the grand total came to $20.40.

In order for this process to cost $1.7 million, there would have to be 83, 333 court cases filed AND APPEALED. The best part is, each case must be different. Red, that means honestly, legally different; not a cut 'n' paste with a different signature.


Irish_Wake
Comment posted February 1, 2010 @ 12:11 am

Got to correct that $1.7 mil error. Can't let incorrect math corrupt the incorrect thinking process.

A case filed by one of the most prolific birther litigants, Philip J. Berg, went all the way up to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. In November the court dismissed the appeal and ordered Berg to pay the legal costs for the defendants, which included the Federal Election Commission. Here was the government's big chance to recoup its millions. But when the FEC submitted its bill, the grand total came to $20.40.

In order for this process to cost $1.7 million, there would have to be 83, 333 court cases filed AND APPEALED. The best part is, each case must be different. Red, that means honestly, legally different; not a cut 'n' paste with a different signature.


louis vuitton wallet
Comment posted September 29, 2010 @ 12:43 pm

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.