See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Judge rejects Montco lawyer's bid to have Obama removed from ballot
Source:
Philadelphia Daily News
URL Source: http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loc ... Obama_removed_from_ballot.html
Published: Oct 25, 2008
Author: By MICHAEL HINKELMAN
Post Date: 2008-10-25 10:44:09 by angle
Keywords: None
Views: 2256
Comments: 88
hinkelm@phillynews.com 215-854-2656 A federal judge in Philadelphia last night threw out a complaint by a Montgomery County lawyer who claimed that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was not qualified to be president and that his name should be removed from the Nov. 4 ballot. Philip J. Berg alleged in a complaint filed in federal district court on Aug. 21 against Obama, the Democratic National Committee and the Federal Election Commission, that Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya. Berg claimed that the Democratic presidential standardbearer is not even an American citizen but a citizen of Indonesia and therefore ineligible to be president. He alleged that if Obama was permitted to run for president and subsequently found to be ineligible, he and other voters would be disenfranchised. U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick had denied Berg's request for a temporary restraining order on Aug. 22 but had not ruled on the merits of the suit until yesterday. Obama and the Democratic National Committee had asked Surrick to dismiss Berg's complaint in a court filing on Sept. 24. They said that Berg's claims were "ridiculous" and "patently false," that Berg had "no standing" to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for president because he had not shown the requisite harm to himself. Surrick agreed. In a 34-page memorandum and opinion, the judge said Berg's allegations of harm were "too vague and too attenuated" to confer standing on him or any other voters. Surrick ruled that Berg's attempts to use certain laws to gain standing to pursue his claim that Obama was not a natural-born citizen were "frivolous and not worthy of discussion." The judge also said the harm Berg alleged did "not constitute an injury in fact" and Berg's arguments to the contrary "ventured into the unreasonable." For example, Berg had claimed that Obama's nomination deprived citizens of voting for Sen. Hillary Clinton in November. (Berg backed Clinton in the primaries.) Berg could not be reached for comment last night. Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961, and the campaign posted a document issued by Hawaii on its Web site, fight thesmears.com, confirming his birth there. Berg said in court papers that the image was a forgery. The nonpartisan Web site FactCheck.org examined the original document and said it was legitimate. Further, a birth announcement in the Aug. 13, 1961, Honolulu Advertiser listed Obama's birth there on Aug. 4. *
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: angle (#0)
Surrick agreed. In a 34-page memorandum and opinion, the judge said Berg's allegations of harm were "too vague and too attenuated" to confer standing on him or any other voters. Is the court inferring the need for a "Class Action Suit" or that regardless of the number of people complaining they nor Berg "STANDING" to sue,. It's the same old shit. Lower courts either "routinely" deny the claim or (in criminal matters) find someone guilty and let them appeal the decision for a hundred fucking years and spend a million dollars. It's bullshit. If anyone in this audience doubts we're in a bar-free prison they're deaf, dumb, and blind. The CONstitutional qualifications to become the President are clear. The court's reluctance to mandate the enforcement of this requirement demonstrates a glaring arrogance disrespecting the law that pales compared to Obama's. All he ever needed to do was provide an Original/Certified copy of his birth certificate, which should have been required prior to placement on any ballot in the Primaries. If this doesn't clearly demonstrate the non-status / non-existence of the CONstitution what will ?
There is no honor in bending one's knee to the banking elites that are robbing the children you claim to love of their future. Soon they'll convince those very same children that you deserve to be eliminated ... and they may be right.
Your analysis stands vindicated.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Too vague and attenuated ... like where's the birth certificate is too vague ... gimme a break.
There is no honor in bending one's knee to the banking elites that are robbing the children you claim to love of their future. Soon they'll convince those very same children that you deserve to be eliminated ... and they may be right.
You can't hide this. I'm sure that it's unlikely any newsprint from that year is doing well in Hawaii, but I'm also sure microfiche copies exist of this newspaper page. Remember, once microfiche has been imprinted, it is unalterable. Any alterations would be obvious even if it were possible. Not to mention, more then one microfiche of this is more likely then not to exist. I always knew this was a bullshit suit, but if this idiot is so sure of himself - and I'm sure he's aware of his con - he can easily prove whether or not this is true about the newspaper record of this, even with no access to the original birth certificate himself.
Berg has been on 3 nationwide radio talk shows. The next step is to appeal to the Court of Appeals on Monday. If they turn him down, he can appeal to the Supreme Court. Berg has a tape of Sarah Obama made during the last debate saying that her grandson Obama was born in Kenya. He will release it as soon as he has a certified translation. That will make the radio talk shows burn up the air waves. Whatever way the Supreme Court rules will bring the issue to the headlines. It g could change the race. McCain is a worthless candidate. A radio talk show host if he did win it would only be because he was carried across the finish line. Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin could solve the problem of standing by joining his lawsuit. Their lack of participation says a lot about them. Berg emailed me and said he would contact Baldwin but I guess he could not det through to him.
The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie
Hounddawg made a good analysis of this lawsuit.
His black grandmother says that she remembers his birth in Kenya. BHO's silence is damning enough evidence.
as do other relatives
It's the second mouse that gets the cheese
There are more than one copy of a birth certificate. If one exists, it's required to qualify to hold this particular public office and should definitely be produced prior to election day. The State of Hawaii should then be mandated to produce it. A college graduate should know when to use the word "then" and the word "than" ... actually a 4th grader should be capable.
There is no honor in bending one's knee to the banking elites that are robbing the children you claim to love of their future. Soon they'll convince those very same children that you deserve to be eliminated ... and they may be right.
Hillary would be a better choice.
Since Obama obviously or pretty close to obviously isn'a a citizen. Are you going to vote for McCain to make sure that a foreigner doesn't rule over us?
Hounddawg accused me of hating whites and having something to hide. My silence is "damning evidence"? Not.
Since Obama obviously or pretty close to obviously isn'a a citizen. Are you going to vote for McCain to make sure that a foreigner doesn't rule over us? I don't think you know what obviously means. There isn't one shred of evidence that anyone can back up that Obama was born anywhere other than in Honolulu.
Berg will release the tape of Sarah Obama saying her grandson was born in Kenya will be released as soon as the translation can be verified.
The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie
Obama refuesed to provide his birth certificate. He is ineligible.
I don't know what you're talking about.
That particular argument does sound bogus. Then again, court filings are typically filled with every kitchen sink argument a lawyer can dream up, since any not presented can't be argued on appeal. But it's entirely possible the judge has NO desire to be the one guy in the country to kick Obama off the ballot. He/his family/his home might not survive the week, especially in Philly. His safest bet is to hand it off to his big brothers in robes and let them deal with it.
Newspapers print birth announcements they are given, just like marriages. They don't do background checking on them. If your argument is that the Constitution no longer applies, please make that case. You will find support on this forum.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
In a "what caliber should I use to blow my brains out" kinda way... ;-)
Bring on the Depression. Bring it the F*** ON! If digging ditches and eating beans for a few years is what it takes for me to see some worthless sacks of crap bankers and politicians living in sack cloth and being spat upon by my fellow Americans well... where's my shovel?!?!
You say obama's silence is damning. I say perhaps the charges are ludicrous and not worthy of response. That's what I'm talking about.
Other than his grandmother and a couple of other witnesses who were in the delivery room in the hospital in Kenya where they said he was born? And keep in mind that the grandma in Africa is not the one he threw under the bus but ol' whitey--the one who pretty much raised his ungrateful ass--who he has gone to see now with big crocodile tears in his eyes.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. This case arose solely out of brain storming on how approach Swift Boating in regards to Obama and on what. I support the ruling, it makes good sense. There is no 'search for the truth,' there is recognition Swift Boating worked unfairly in Kerry, and a desire to repeat the success. That won't work with Barack Obama, he is way too formidable to not note what to watch for, and then figure out how to counter it. Barack Obama is going to be the 44th president of the United States and will serve eight years at the most. And he was born in Hawaii.
BHO's silence is damning enough evidence. I don't understand why Obama and McCain are not REQUIRED - from the get go - to produce a bona fide birth certificate to the Elections Commission and those birth certificates need to be made available to public scrutiny in the FEC's office. Screw Obama's silence. If Obama wants to be President of the USA, he needs to prove his eligibility. Period. I also believe that anyone who registers to vote in federal and state elections needs to produce proof of holding US CITIZENSHIP at the time of registration. On voting day, picture ID needs to be produced before a person is allowed to vote. Period. It violates every US citizen's rights when inelegible Pres candidates are allowed to run for the Oval Office and when non-US citizens are allowed to vote. I have no idea why legal organizations like the ACLU have not challenged the loosey-goosey practices that are allowed in America today. Holding elected office and voting are the two most important and formerly cherished aspects of US citizenship. Do any of you think the Founding Fathers would want non-citizens to vote or to run for public office?
This game exploits the fears of Islamic or native African exoticness, exacerbated by what racist culture still exists in the United States. There is no doubt enough at stake to make people take the risk of completely discrediting themselves with a slap suit like this one for some idiot to make a go at it. But this time around, Swift Boating is old news and a factor that is dealt with with competence and with very little fanfare, which is how it should be. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, John McCain was born in Panama. So one wild card in this bull shit game from the get go is that McCain himself is not native born. He just has fifty percent more American national blood as credentials to back up his claim be is not what the founders wanted excluded from the applicant pool for the presidency. Even if this fairy tale were to be true in some parallel universe somewhere. I say stop being cry babies and that if junkies can get help and get off of dope, Republicans can get help and get off of the quick and dirty fix called Swift Boating attacks. There is nothing about this case that deserves to be given standing.
LOL! Agreed, however, she is one who could claim damage and therefore have standing to file the suit.
I agree.
There is no honor in bending one's knee to the banking elites that are robbing the children you claim to love of their future. Soon they'll convince those very same children that you deserve to be eliminated ... and they may be right.
Proving natural born citizenship is required, what's ludicrous about asking for the birth certificate ?
There is no honor in bending one's knee to the banking elites that are robbing the children you claim to love of their future. Soon they'll convince those very same children that you deserve to be eliminated ... and they may be right.
Not if he doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements, he isn't. and there is no substantial proof as to where he was born that has been presented. If you guys try to force him and he doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements, then you issue a clarion call for Revolution. In face, you invite it and you demand it. Do you really want to go there? This whole issue could go away very quickly. The real question is what does Obama have to hide that he doesn't make it go away very quickly. What does he have in his closet that he doesn't make this issue disappear instantly? What other lies has he told? That's the problem. This issue could disappear instantly, only, for whatever reason, Obama chooses to let it fester and so it grows until it takes on a life of its own. If Obama can't respect the Constitution enough to establish his credentials, then no American should have any respect for him as President. The Obama campaign opened this can of worms trying to bounce McCain. Now Obama gets to feel the same. To make matters worse, you, Mike, took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Your candidate has not shown that he meets the Constitutional requirements to be elected President. YOU of all people should be demanding proof. Or was your oath nothing, just "mere words" that you uttered and are devoid of any meaning?
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
Not if he doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements, he isn't. and there is no substantial proof as to where he was born that has been presented. If you guys try to force him and he doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements, then you issue a clarion call for Revolution. In face, you invite it and you demand it. Do you really want to go there? This whole issue could go away very quickly. The real question is what does Obama have to hide that he doesn't make it go away very quickly. What does he have in his closet that he doesn't make this issue disappear instantly? What other lies has he told? That's the problem. This issue could disappear instantly, only, for whatever reason, Obama chooses to let it fester and so it grows until it takes on a life of its own. If Obama can't respect the Constitution enough to establish his credentials, then no American should have any respect for him as President. Obama is obviously hiding something! Title: SPACE RESERVED FOR NEWS ON COURT ORDER (BERG Vs. OBAMA)
That much is the only thing that is perfectly clear.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Concur. People are so desperate for anything other than what they have currently that they are willing to take anything and aren't vetting properly. Last time the voters did this, we got Carter then Reagan. Looks like we're about to see a repeat.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
I don't even have any respect for him as an individual, let alone President. If he is elected I believe he will prove to be worse than Bush before the first year is over. And that is something I don't say lightly because I didn't think it could get any worse than Clinton but Bush proved me wrong. And I think Obama will be a disaster for this country. I think the same is true of McCain but at least everyone KNOWS that McCain is an actual American citizen. Lots of us aren't that sure about Obama and he doesn't care enough to end the controversy. And you gotta wonder what it is in his background that is so bad that he is going to these lengths to hide it. Is it just the fact that he is not really a citizen or is it because his "uncle Frank" is in reality his old man?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. What bothers me is that there is no "real choice" in the Presidential race, at least not if one wishes to affect the outcome. On either side, people are not going to be voting for a candidate they really want, but rather, they are voting AGAINST one or the other. Obama continues to run against Bush. Third parties will take the "Both of you - OUT!" votes. ...but nobody is voting for a candidate they say "Yes, this person would make an excellent President" for that reason. Not even 4um's Obama fanatics are taking that road. They just don't want McCain and that is their primary motivator.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
Actually, there is one guy running that I would gladly vote for and I do believe would be an excellent President. Chuck Baldwin. But he didn't make the ballot in this state and they don't count write in votes. When he was still in the race, Ron Paul was my choice and I have always liked Ron. The only chance I have ever had to vote for him was when he ran as a Libertarian in '88 and I voted for him then. Been a LONG time since I voted for any establishment whore and I am not going to mess that up this year by voting for either of their hand-picked losers who have sold us out.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Amen.
I voted for Dr. Paul in the primary myself and would prefer him to any of the folks running for President, whether they are on the ballot or not at this present time. My vote went third-party once again. I've only voted "establishment" for President once, and not since.
"A leader, for a change." - Jimmy Carter, 1976 campaign slogan. Sound familiar? Here it comes again!
That of course explains why Oh'bummer will not, cannot, produce a valid proof of Birth. As well that does not even settle the situation in Indonesia and the likely possibility that his citizenship, if he ever qualified, was discarded to become an Indonesian citizen. Face it Mike Oh'bummer is bad news. Since like the, unlamented Robin, you are probably a single issue, Government Hellthcare, voter and getting Oh'Bummer only guarantees that the Pharmaceutical Companies will dictate your Hellthcare and you'll get the eugenics general human extermination program the insane cabal that owns Oh'bummer wants. Don't forget Big Pharma has supported Oh'bummer at a rate of about 5 to 1 in campaign bribes over McScrewball. At least with McNutz we likely get gridlock. Desirable from my perspective on slowing down the Police State set up under Bush-Clinton-Bush.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
If elected POUSA how will he get a security clearance??
Since you mentioned it (swift boating), I thought I might respond. If you wanted to look back at the Bush/Kerry election cycle, you would see that I never uttered a word about Kerry. And, if I did it wasn't about swift boats or anything that would indicate any difference between him and Bush. (I have always hated Bush and Kerry). Obama is the most dangerous affront to the American way of life I have ever witnessed. He's a communist. He has no respect for the law or the Constitution that he will swear to uphold and defend should he be elected. His first utterances as President will be blatant lies, and afterwards it will get far worse, it generally does. A simple thing like showing the American people that he was born in the U.S. in order to prove he qualifies for the office shouldn't be too difficult. The fact that he refuses to do this simple task indicates that the birth certificate doesn't exist or there is something about the document that he wishes to keep secret. If the birth certificate indicates that his father was someone besides what we've been told, who cares, it doesn't eliminate him as a potential president. If he feels this information is too important to reveal and then chooses to keep the information secret he should withdraw from the race. Frankly, all of the candidates are criminals, but to watch this man flaunt the laws and the Constitution prior to achieving office is beyond scary, it's insanity. I would readily admit that Bush has destroyed the Republican Party and the country if it hadn't already been destroyed before his arrival and he was just adding the necessary police state legal planks for someone like Obama to implement.
and then it opens the door for "the terminator" good post, doug.
God, you're optimistic, thinking this crap can continue through an Obama administration before the terminator could ascend the throne. (The terminator's foreign birth is well known, but Obama's raid could set a precedent that could cause the crooked courts to rule in his favor or the CONgress could try to amend the CONstitution ... nothing can be ruled out because the PTB seem intent upon declaring openly their agenda to overthrow the country.)
b. I would readily admit that Bush has destroyed the Republican Party and the country if it hadn't already been destroyed before his arrival and he was just adding the necessary police state legal planks for someone like Obama to implement. a. I wholeheartedly agree with you. Obama should have VOLUNTEERED to produce his birth certificate for public scrutiny months ago. Ditto for McCain. Both candidates are running for the most powerful ELECTED position in our nation. It is absolutely essential that the electorate ( not friggin's Dem or Republican parties) be satisfied that the candidates satisfy Constitutional requirements to assume office. Mike, you used to have what I considered a reasonable and sensible mind. How partisan and blind you are showing yourself to be about Obama and this issue of his eligibility to run for US President. You realize of course that each President recites the following oath at inauguration and in accordance with Article II, Section of the US Constitution: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Preserving and protecting and defending THE CONSTITUTION are vital responsibilities of the Office of President and so it follows that it is vital that any candidate running for this constitutionally enshrined office needs to show beyond any shadow of doubt to the US electorate at large, proof of US citizenship and eligibility to run for this office. Whether you or I like it or not, John McCain's 1936 birth to 2 US citizens on a military base in the Panama Canal zone makes him eligible to run as a US Presidential candidate per US Code: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1403.html TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1403 § 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904 (a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States. As to Barack Obama his eligibility is highly suspect and that's why he needs to produce his birth certificate to allay concerns. It has zero to do with "Swift boating" Obama because he had a Muslim father. Rather it has all to do with Obama's mother and her eligibility to pass on US citizenship to her son under US law at the time. And the person formally questioning Obama's eligibility is a life long Democrat, Philip Berg, not someone from the Republican Party, another fact that defuses your notion that Obama is being "swift boated." Here's some cut and paste from various sites that summarize the issues. ...the laws on the books at the time of his birth hold that U.S. citizenship may only pass to a child born overseas to a U.S. citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the former was at least 19 years of age. Sen. Obama’s mother was only 18 at the time. Therefore, because U.S. citizenship could not legally be passed on to him... ...Plaintiff Berg is seeking redress from his being denied the opportunity to vote for a Democratic candidate who could legally serve as the president of the United States. This suit demonstrates that all U.S. voters are being denied this opportunity. To preclude a looming national crisis, Berg asked the court, in his suit initiated on August 21, 2008, to order that Obama and the Democratic National Committee produce numerous documents relating to the candidate’s citizenship. ... So far, Obama and the DNC have attempted to stall, sideline, and defeat Berg’s simplest request: that the candidate produce, in particular, an officially verified, crimp-sealed photocopy of Obama’s original, unabridged birth certificate. If an original exists, it would have been signed in ink at the actual time of Obama’s birth by the doctor and administrator in the Honolulu hospital Obama claims as his place of birth. This long-form birth certificate would be expected to include other detailed information typical of such a document. The short-form certificate displayed on Obama’s official Website is not such a document. In fact, hard as this may be to believe, it is likely an altered version of a Hawaii document referencing the birth of Obama’s half-sister. Obama’s mother, then a U.S. citizen, resided while pregnant in Kenya during her brief marriage to Obama’s natural father, a citizen of Kenya. Berg states he has proof that in 1961, Obama’s mother, because of her very late-stage pregnancy, was denied permission to board a flight from Kenya to Hawaii. She was only able to go to Hawaii after Obama had been born, at which point she attempted to “register” his birth. Berg states he can verify that Obama was in fact born in Kenya. In addition, Obama’s mother, because of her young age, did not meet the residency requirements under U.S. law to give her child U.S. citizenship. Berg claims that even were Obama to prove a status of “natural born citizen,” he lost that citizenship at age five when, according to Berg’s documentation, Obama’s divorced mother remarried and moved to Indonesia. Mother and son both became Indonesian citizens. The laws at that time required his mother to renounce her U.S. citizenship and thus that of her son.... b. Indeed. That's by the Dems were W's willing partners in the course of the last 8 years, the last 2 years when the Dems held the majority in the House and Congress are the most damning of this complicity.
Oops, I meant to ping you rather than Ada as a response to your previous message to me.
Look, the Obama cat will be disqualified and we will end up with Biden and then the race riots will proceed apace..
A year ago I would have been dismissive of such a prediction, but what other reason is there for an ineligible Pres candidate, who happens to be black, to run and then be turned aside when ineligibility is demonstrated? This together with the fact that arguably the best qualified Dem candidate - a US citizen Caucasian woman - was not chosen to be the Dem's Pres candidate is most unsettling.
Okay is there a possibility that this is all political Jerry Springer show and that ultimatly Junior will declare himself dictator for life? Can we rule that scenario out?
Everyone's assumptions as to how this matter woulda, shoulda or coulda been settled are based largely on the Constitution, WHICH DOESN'T EXIST.
Huh??
Can we rule that scenario out? No. He's a mad man who'd like nothing better than to be dictator.
The "federal" government is a commercial environment that operates strictly upon commercial/contract law. All discussion about the Constitution is hogwash for the consumption of idiots (us). Just like this case (and all others based 100% upon the Constitution) was dismissed without ordering that Obama must be a natural born American to be President and prove it, the court spewed a lot of nonsense about Berg not having standing to (sue) request such information and thereby the court lacked jurisdiction to grant Bergs claims. The "federal" government is not the National Government founded upon the Constitution (like most think it is because a charade is played out by politicians). It's "federal" and its boundaries while being invisible extend to every place that relies upon federal reserve notes to conduct business. It's easier to say it this way: Anywhere they use FRNs to conduct business is not a Constitutional location. The Constitution prohibits commercial paper as legal tender for debts. That's why I continually harp on the "funny money" and associated creation of credit ... which is consuming the country.
Huh?? The constitution is de facto dead. Or, at the very least it's no impediment to good govt as these mad tyrants understand it. Once a judge ruled that Art 1 sec 10 (which mandates gold and silver as lawful money) was "superfluous" the constitution caught the flu, and after the signing statements, Patriot Act, renditions, denial of counsel and trial by jury, electronic eavesdropping without warrants, Ruby Ridge, Waco, OKC and 9/11, well, let's just say that all of the politicians, judges and armed agents who secretly resented being public servants have taken to this new tyranny like ducks to water. They're just another armed warlord gang and the only way to compel them to respect our rights is with force, and the American people just don't have the stomach for that. Most voters are seniors on the dole and they couldn't care less about abstract constitutional violations that don't affect them. They want the federal govt to continue so those SS checks will keep coming, and they don't care how many SWAT raids are pulled against dissidents, patriots, etc.,. In fact they're all for war if it keeps the govt happy and those checks keep coming to them. And, the govt is careful never to imply that social security or Medicare must be cut to pay for war. Oh no, no matter how much debt accrues that won't happen, and in so doing they buy the silent assent of the largest (and most corrupt) voting demographic.
When is duck season ???
October through January.
Okay but none of the seniors are gonna be real happy when they find out Obemebas health care plan recquires them to be euthanized..
Well, the govt may blame a bad flu vaccine just as they did in the winter of 70-71. There's no reason to announce the plan to the gullible people. Many won't take another flu shot so, it'll require a killer flu or other bug to finish them off....
"Now I know what Jesus was going through!"__Aileen Wuornos
That's strange you mention flu shot because getting one this has sure been promoted by everyone. Even at the apt complex where I live they are giving free shots and they have never ever done that!! What happened in 1970-71?
What happened in 1970-71? The winter of 70-71 the flu shot killed more people than the flu and I nearly lost my mother. It was an "oopsie" the govt claimed, when a live strain was accidentally substituted for an attenuated one. (and, needless to say no one went to jail or was punished) That is the exact mechanism they will use again. And, do you remember this? It was an error with potentially devastating consequences. Last September, Meridian Bioscience, a medical company, began sending out more than 3,700 virus-test kits to labs throughout the United States and 18 other countries--all part of a routine quality-assurance program to ensure that such facilities are accurately identifying biological agents. Problem is, the kits included a deadly flu strain that had killed more than 1 million people in the 1957 "Asian flu" pandemic. So, it can either be an accident by our govt, an act of "terrorism" or a vehicle collision that releases the deadly strain(s). And now This: "Now I know what Jesus was going through!"__Aileen Wuornos
Fair notice, I never bozo, but I am done with fantasy birth threads. I have no interest in wasting my time with them. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. Jerk yourselves off on this crap without me, I answer no pings any more to these garbage threads on this topic.
Fair notice to you. Your monkey boy is a little commie and so are you It's the second mouse that gets the cheese
You are simply avoiding the issues. Even without the likelyhood of a foreign birth being covered up - which you are in adamant denial on - "you can't make me look, you can't, you can't, you can't" ... There are plenty of question marks regarding the Obamessiah and how he was rapidly built up and presented as a candidate from nowhere. That of course fits the "Silver Blaze" criterion: "But Holmes the dog did not bark in the night." "Exactly Watson and that is what was curious." Either you can continue to live in denial or you can confront reality however harsh it might seem. I much prefer living in reality however grim it may now be. The only way the course can be righted is to first confront reality and see things as they are not as you would wish them to be.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
your post brought to mind this Patrick Henry quote (one of my favorites) For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it.
Read my lips thick headed one, I--D-O-N'T--B-U-Y--T-H-E--L-I-E. Quite simply, the story is bull shit. You are a loon if you swallow it, and that is a personal problem of yours' I don't have any interest in.
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it. One of my favorite Patrick Henry lines as well. I imagine you are aware that it came from the same speech as the the immortal: "...I care not what course others may take, but as for me, Give me Liberty, or Give me Death."
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Quite simply, the story is bull shit. And you know this to be true how? I am not so much arguing it to be true as pointing out that there is insufficient evidence to substantiate it, and that the actions of the principal parties is such as to suggest that they are hiding something. What that hidden something is I cannot state because is in fact being hidden. In approaching any question of fact I attempt to apply principles of sound reasoning regardless of how I would "prefer to believe". Churchill, whatever his failings, was known to turn a good phrase. "Truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is. ..." That which is true remains true regardless of how we would fool ourselves and prefer to believe something else. Not desiring the truth, or not knowing it, results in false conclusions. I do not like false conclusions as they have a nasty way of biting. The evidences presented so far are such as to strongly suggest that the manner and place of his birth is being covered over. Why would they do that if all is on the "up and up"? It is not even my argument that McNutz is a better man. He's not. I do however, care about the rule of law, and that "goddamn piece of paper" which we laughingly call a Constitution. If he is not qualified per the Constitution, and if that is the case it would seem to knowingly so, what does that say about Oh'Bummer's respect for the rule of law?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Fuck off. Can't you understand English? So why are you pinging Christine? I am not obliged to indulge in your fantasies.
This may shock you but at first I thought like you ...what's the big deal here? Then I looked closer and as usual when one does that it creates more questions than answers and neither add up,heres a few of the problems Being born in Bulawayo Zimbabwe I am often requested to show proof of my legal status from the DMV to renting a apartment why is this a problem for Obama surely they have tighter requirements when you apply to become a senator Why did a Republican governor seal the records till Nov 5th Is the judges ruling more important in the context of what standing does the citizen have when he challenges the constitutionality of anything after he found Berk had no standing for failure to show injury was Burk stupid in his filings did he file in the the wrong court? Something is not right here I don't have the answers but I'll keep digging
Your misemotional reaction aside I'll repeat the very reasonable question: Upon what factual basis do you judge the denials of the allegations to be the truth in preference to the allegations which remain unanswered and avoided? At what point would you prefer to believe a lie because it is more comfortable and fits your mindset?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Some of you loathe Barack Obama and want a scapegoat to be a whipping boy for your angst. I am here to tell you that is not me. I come here to engage in lively discussion on politics and the issues and have done so here a few years now. In fact I've been doing this since I joined 'The Well' in 1995 and had a incredibly wonderful time on an open forum with liberals and conservatives who actually made community and got along at Time.com/Politics. This is the first forum I have established myself on as an interlocutor in good standing where that standing is disregarded because some people need a scapegoat. At Time.com/Politics, if you called someone a fascist, communist, socialist, or whatever that was a blanket, generic accusation to try to win an argument or somehow taint your opponent with it, we all defaulted to a rule named after Tom Mandel who developed it. We would call 'Mandel Rule,' and by common consent the argument was over. The intellectually lazy and malicious person doing the broad brush accusation would back off, and real, meaningful discussion would replace the foolish, "you are a commie!!!" "Am not!!!" "You are!!!" etc. OI, understand this, I absolutely positively and with no reservation do not find this desperation gambit you hawk credible or believable. And if I don't want to play on the hamster wheel with you, honor that. Rotara and Flintlock, both of you have made your fucking point you don't like me. That is your perogerative. It is not your job though to try to drive me away or try to rattle my cage with a constant barrage of posts. Christine, I respect you and like you, but I am here to talk issues, politics and current events. I am not here to play games with these two jerks who have no sense of propriety or respect for anyone with whom they stoutly disagree with. I also have the right to roll my eyes at a foolish topic like the birth place fairy tale and not post on it, much as we all wish BeaChooser had done the same with 9-11 when he made it clear he felt the same way about that topic, but refused to stop disrupting the discussion. Enjoy your discussion on that topic, but I am not going into it when all that would happen is I would be obliged to act like BeaChooser after a very short time dealing with it. I am quite serious, I am giving you an honest answer; I absolutely do not believe that crap and don't want to talk about fantasy bullshit like that. I also am done trading insults with R and F. I left high school decades ago, that is where those childish tactics belong. These two need to grow up. I can come keep coming down to their level and bitch slap them about it, but that is perpetuating nothing good or positive in this forum. That is not what I come on line to do in this forum. As per the mission statement of this forum, I have a right to be here, and so do you. Everyone needs to remember that, and honor this. Mike McCarthy
No desperation here. I loathe both of the two candidates put up by our Plutocratic Oligarch's equally, and I hate no one - not even them. However, I do not see my question as unreasonable, particularly given your assertions. I am simply exploring, and directing your attention, to the key question: Upon what basis do you accept the denials of the validity of the question as regards Obama's personal history? It is either true or false. If you accept the denials as true you then either do so upon facts which you can point to or it is simply your personal preference to believe it regardless of facts. At this point the evidences, as demonstrated by the various players, suggests that the representations made by Obama are false. The only attestation to their validity is one document, which is not a "Birth Certificate" but a "Record of Live Birth" which is a significant factual distinction, followed by attacks, legal maneuvers to avoid the question, and character attacks upon those who raise the question. These are all red flags which suggest that an address to the facts would be damaging. Yes, I do loathe Obama - as I do McCain, but that is not the point in a matter of factual issues. The question is one of facts and truth not my personal opinion. I have at no point addressed you other than as one adult to another, despite our disagreements, so your attempt to obfuscate by referencing someone else's personal attacks on some other forum have no factual relevance to the question at hand. As well referencing the personal attacks of other posters at other times has no bearing or relevance upon my questions and comments. You have made an assertion of fact and I am simply exploring the question of: Upon what factual basis do you make that assertion? You are avoiding that question. Why?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Pussy
It's the second mouse that gets the cheese
The sad thing is that they're probably grown but all kaka roaches have their limits, no matter how much kaka they consume because most of the kaka they ingest they end up regurgitating, then re-ingesting it with little benefit to their growth.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
I might add that it is not even a matter of going and researching the question to come up with a refutation. The question is why do you believe the unsupported denials NOW?
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Mike, While it may be so that some here loathe Obama, I don't believe that anyone wants a scapegoat for it. Many believe there are good reasons to loathe Obama as his political ideology is an affront to all they hold dear and they view anyone who supports that ideology in the same light (see Greg Evenson's commentary here). I would guess that you have the same opinions and feelings towards certain politicians and those who support them as well. At Time.com/Politics, if you called someone a fascist, communist, socialist, or whatever that was a blanket, generic accusation to try to win an argument or somehow taint your opponent with it, we all defaulted to a rule named after Tom Mandel who developed it. This compelled me to refer to my Free Speech thread. I read my policy and every post on that thread. I would invite you to do the same with particular attention to robin's, Freedom William's, and Indie's. I am convinced that it is a sound policy. Your posts on it indicate to me that you were in full support of it too. I don't care for the Mandel Rule imposed at time.com/Politics as I feel that it restricts and limits the speech of the participants. That's not the atmosphere that I want to promote here. Now having said that, I know that there are occasions when interlocutors (to use your term) will go over the top in their rhetoric and personal attacks, but that reflects poorly on them, does it not, and not the forum as a whole.
Upon what basis do you accept the denials of the validity of the question as regards Obama's personal history? It is either true or false. If you accept the denials as true you then either do so upon facts which you can point to or it is simply your personal preference to believe it regardless of facts. At this point the evidences, as demonstrated by the various players, suggests that the representations made by Obama are false. An excellent post. The Obamaphiles are not big on truth, at least they don't seem to expect it from their messiah.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Thanks. I think I can sum up the Obama Phenomena in one word: PsyOps. With a combination of triggers and phrases, likely thoroughly Focus Grouped, the Obamaniacs have been very effectively herded through the application of scientific perception management.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Greg Evenson has zero credibility, and I have no interest in his nonsense. I also disagree with you on the Mandel Rule, as it hits at intellectually lazy attacks with a broad brush that has no bearing in fact. It ends pointless attacks that are only malicious in purpose. I also know well that racism is a point that deserves no further debate and is a waste of time and has no place in a real free speech forum. I would say we disagree on allot, and agree on some things.
So, Mike, you don't think that the point that some may "loathe Obama for his political ideology" is worthy of a respectful response to christine? Your last post to her was just goddam disrespectful and you're running the serious risk of validating what Obama's critics have been saying all along-cries of racism will be used to deflect all legit questions and criticisms, and if you're starting that shit now then we can expect it in spades (no pun intended) if he is elected. Now, you'd better try a little harder to show some respect or she may realize that she's been showing you more than you deserve. And, I'm starting to lean that way myself.
At worst my post was blunt. It expressed to the point my opinion. I already said and meant earlier today that I like and respect Christine. When this is so, I usually do not then start pandering to people I like and respect. As far as the lack of politesse goes, it seems to be a chronic trait of the virtual community here to not use it. So it goes, I can play it that way as well. Thanks for the feedback though. As far as the sentiment on racism, it has been my stated opinion since I first posted in 1995 elsewhere. I have been very consistent on what it is. The presidential race has had zero influence on it, and I speak here for me, no one else.
Well, Mikey, you despise it when you're pigeonholed as a "commie" leftist" "socialist", etc., and trust me when I say that christine wrote a very insightful post to you which you dismissed without responding to even a single point. You simply implied that she is a racist and unworthy of your pearls of wisdom. I'll bet that if you ask her she'll tell you that it frosted her. (it's not her way to say so but ask her and see what she says) And if your last post is your recollection then you're being too kind to yourself. I read her post and yours and Mister, you were awfully rude to her. She made valid points which you may be too tired and gwumpy to address now, (it's been a long day) but to dismiss them with a blanket "racism" stamp was really unacceptable.
Your bias, not mine. I have not discussed racism in any depth with her, and therefore have no real insight as to her opinion on racism. As for my opinion, it is what it is, I never compromise it. If you like it, great, if not, it's not my problem. I might add too I don't care if you think I was rude or not. Nobody is lifting much of a finger about the extreme rudeness I an getting from some quarters in here, so BFD. I made no accusation that she was in any way racist, and I do think that author is full of shit and disgusting. I do believe, in light of my extreme disgust of the SOB, I significantly toned down the post to where I easily could of put it. Thanks again for sharing, it's always a pleasure to hear your august opinion. ;- )
But Mike, you reply to HER POINTS NOT THE AUTHOR's was this: "I also know well that racism is a point that deserves no further debate and is a waste of time and has no place in a real free speech forum. I would say we disagree on allot, and agree on some things." Now, your belated clarification is somewhat reassuring, but had I not asked you would have allowed the above reply to christine's points to stand. I'm sorry you're getting beat up but you've known all along that you represent a minority viewpoint. In fact you seem to thrive on that so I don't understand it suddenly being used to excuse rudeness to someone who took the time to ask very good albeit pointed questions-the kind of questions that test your honesty and intellectual integrity. And they deserve an answer. Get some sleep because we need to continue this discussion....
Have you never heard the wise adage about not casting your pearls before swine? Obummer supporters apparently think he is the messiah or something and will never admit to you or anyone else that he may not be all that they hope he is. And the sad thing is that he probably isn't even an American citizen but he has hoodwinked a sizable number of people into believing his bs. If he is in fact an American citizen he would have had no problem producing a CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. The fact that he hasn't indicates that he is hiding something.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. With a combination of triggers and phrases, likely thoroughly Focus Grouped, the Obamaniacs have been very effectively herded through the application of scientific perception management. Obama Drawing Twice As Many Searches As McCain Obama Drawing Twice As Many Searches As McCain Nicholas Carlson | October 31, 2008 4:49 PM Yahoo mined their search data and reports: * In the past week, Senator Obama has drawn more than twice as many queries as Senator McCain. * That's not necessarily all positive, as the nature of the queries indicate that people still have a lot of questions -lookups range from questions about his biography to his birth certificate, from his grandmother to his gun control platform. Indeed, according to HitWise, for the four weeks ending October 25, 2008 "barack obama birth certificate" was the fourth-most common search term driving traffic to BarackObama.com. "Barack Obama Antichrist" comes in at 26.
Obama Crimes.com Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server.
Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Wonder what's up with that?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Wonder what's up with that? I am trying to find out.
Truth takes it in the shorts, again.
#2. To: angle (#0)
(Edited)
They said that Berg's claims were "ridiculous" and "patently false," that Berg had "no standing" to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for president because he had not shown the requisite harm to himself.
#3. To: HOUNDDAWG (#0)
#4. To: angle (#0)
Berg's allegations of harm were "too vague and too attenuated"
#5. To: lodwick (#1)
"Further, a birth announcement in the Aug. 13, 1961, Honolulu Advertiser listed Obama's birth there on Aug. 4."
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#6. To: Original_Intent, noone222, HOUNDDAWG, angle, Christine (#3)
#7. To: noone222 (#4)
#8. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
#9. To: lodwick (#8)
His black grandmother says that she remembers his birth in Kenya.
#10. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
(Edited)
#11. To: Horse (#6)
Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin could solve the problem of standing by joining his lawsuit. Their lack of participation says a lot about them. Berg emailed me and said he would contact Baldwin but I guess he could not det through to him.
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. —Thomas Jefferson, 1802
#12. To: angle (#7)
Hounddawg made a good analysis of this lawsuit.
#13. To: lodwick (#8)
BHO's silence is damning enough evidence.
#14. To: Old Friend (#12)
#15. To: Rhino369, Old Friend (#14)
There isn't one shred of evidence
#16. To: Rhino369 (#14)
I don't think you know what obviously means. There isn't one shred of evidence that anyone can back up that Obama was born anywhere other than in Honolulu.
#17. To: angle (#13)
Hounddawg accused me of hating whites and having something to hide. My silence is "damning evidence"? Not.
#18. To: angle (#0)
For example, Berg had claimed that Obama's nomination deprived citizens of voting for Sen. Hillary Clinton in November.
#19. To: Ferret Mike (#5)
#20. To: farmfriend (#11)
Hillary would be a better choice.
#21. To: lodwick (#17)
I don't know what you're talking about.
#22. To: Rhino369 (#14)
(Edited)
There isn't one shred of evidence that anyone can back up that Obama was born anywhere other than in Honolulu.
Lord Acton
#23. To: mirage (#19)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#24. To: lodwick, Ferret Mike, angle, vast (#8)
His black grandmother says that she remembers his birth in Kenya.
#25. To: scrapper2 (#24)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#26. To: Axenolith (#20)
In a "what caliber should I use to blow my brains out" kinda way... ;-)
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. —Thomas Jefferson, 1802
#27. To: angle (#7)
Hounddawg made a good analysis of this lawsuit
#28. To: angle (#21)
I say perhaps the charges are ludicrous
#29. To: Ferret Mike (#23)
(Edited)
Barack Obama is going to be the 44th president of the United States and will serve eight years at the most. And he was born in Hawaii.
#30. To: mirage, Ferret Mike, ALL (#29)
Barack Obama is going to be the 44th president of the United States and will serve eight years at the most. And he was born in Hawaii.
#31. To: TwentyTwelve, mirage, Ferret Mike (#30)
Obama is obviously hiding something!
#32. To: Original_Intent (#31)
Obama is obviously hiding something!
That much is the only thing that is perfectly clear.
#33. To: mirage (#29)
If Obama can't respect the Constitution enough to establish his credentials, then no American should have any respect for him as President.
Lord Acton
#34. To: James Deffenbach (#33)
McCain will suck up the votes of those who can't stand Obama or don't like that kind of campaigning.
#35. To: mirage (#34)
...but nobody is voting for a candidate they say "Yes, this person would make an excellent President" for that reason. Not even 4um's Obama fanatics are taking that road. They just don't want McCain and that is their primary motivator.
Lord Acton
#36. To: James Deffenbach (#35)
Been a LONG time since I voted for any establishment whore and I am not going to mess that up this year by voting for either of their hand-picked losers who have sold us out.
#37. To: James Deffenbach (#35)
#38. To: Ferret Mike (#25)
There is nothing about this case that deserves to be given standing.
#39. To: scrapper2 (#24)
If Obama wants to be President of the USA, he needs to prove his eligibility. Period.
#40. To: Ferret Mike (#25)
(Edited)
But this time around, Swift Boating is old news
#41. To: noone222 (#40)
Frankly, all of the candidates are criminals, but to watch this man flaunt the laws and the Constitution prior to achieving office is beyond scary, it's insanity. I would readily admit that Bush has destroyed the Republican Party and the country if hadn't already been destroyed before his arrival and he was just adding the necessary police state legal planks for someone like Obama to implement.
#42. To: christine (#41)
and then it opens the door for "the terminator"
#43. To: noone222, Ferret Mike, Ada (#40)
a. Frankly, all of the candidates are criminals, but to watch this man flaunt the laws and the Constitution prior to achieving office is beyond scary, it's insanity.
#44. To: Lady X (#43)
#45. To: scrapper2 (#44)
#46. To: Lady X, farm friend, Original_Intent, Ferret Mike, angle (#45)
Look, the Obama cat will be disqualified and we will end up with Biden and then the race riots will proceed apace..
#47. To: scrapper2, bluegrass, HOUNDDAWG, lodwick, Jethro Tull (#46)
#48. To: scrapper2, Lady X, farm friend, Original_Intent, Ferret Mike, angle (#46)
#49. To: noone222 (#48)
Everyone's assumptions as to how this matter woulda, shoulda or coulda been settled are based largely on the Constitution, WHICH DOESN'T EXIST.
#50. To: Lady X (#47)
Okay is there a possibility that this is all political Jerry Springer show and that ultimatly Junior will declare himself dictator for life?
#51. To: Lady X (#49)
(Edited)
Huh??
#52. To: Lady X, noone222 (#49)
Everyone's assumptions as to how this matter woulda, shoulda or coulda been settled are based largely on the Constitution, WHICH DOESN'T EXIST.
#53. To: HOUNDDAWG (#52)
well, let's just say that all of the politicians, judges and armed agents who secretly resented being public servants have taken to this new tyranny like ducks to water.
#54. To: noone222 (#53)
#55. To: HOUNDDAWG (#52)
#56. To: Lady X (#55)
Okay but none of the seniors are gonna be real happy when they find out Obemebas health care plan recquires them to be euthanized..
#57. To: HOUNDDAWG (#56)
#58. To: Lady X (#57)
(Edited)
That's strange you mention flu shot because getting one this has sure been promoted by everyone. Even at the apt complex where I live they are giving free shots and they have never ever done that!!
#59. To: Original_Intent (#38)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#60. To: Ferret Mike (#59)
Fair notice,
#61. To: Ferret Mike (#59)
(Edited)
Fair notice, I never bozo, but I am done with fantasy birth threads. I have no interest in wasting my time with them. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. Jerk yourselves off on this crap without me, I answer no pings any more to these garbage threads on this topic.
#62. To: Original_Intent (#61)
#63. To: Original_Intent (#61)
"You are simply avoiding the issues."
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#64. To: christine (#62)
(Edited)
your post brought to mind this Patrick Henry quote (one of my favorites)
#65. To: Ferret Mike, christine (#63)
(Edited)
Read my lips thick headed one, I--D-O-N'T--B-U-Y--T-H-E--L-I-E.
#66. To: Original_Intent (#65)
(Edited)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#67. To: Ferret Mike (#66)
#68. To: Ferret Mike, christine (#66)
Fuck off. Can't you understand English? So why are you pinging Christine? I am not obliged to indulge in your fantasies.
#69. To: Original_Intent, Flintlock, Rotara, christine (#65)
(Edited)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#70. To: Ferret Mike, christine (#69)
OI, understand this, I absolutely positively and with no reservation do not find this desperation gambit you hawk credible or believable. And if I don't want to play on the hamster wheel with you, honor that.
#71. To: Ferret Mike (#69)
I also am done trading insults with R and F.
#72. To: Ferret Mike (#69)
These two need to grow up.
#73. To: Ferret Mike, christine (#70)
#74. To: Ferret Mike (#69)
(Edited)
Some of you loathe Barack Obama and want a scapegoat to be a whipping boy for your angst. I am here to tell you that is not me. I come here to engage in lively discussion on politics and the issues and have done so here a few years now.
#75. To: Original_Intent (#70)
I am simply exploring, and directing your attention, to the key question:
Lord Acton
#76. To: James Deffenbach (#75)
An excellent post. The Obamaphiles are not big on truth, at least they don't seem to expect it from their messiah.
#77. To: christine (#74)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#78. To: Ferret Mike, christine (#77)
#79. To: HOUNDDAWG (#78)
(Edited)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#80. To: Ferret Mike (#79)
#81. To: HOUNDDAWG (#80)
"You simply implied that she is a racist and unworthy of your pearls of wisdom."
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
#82. To: Ferret Mike (#81)
I made no accusation that she was in any way racist, and I do think that author is full of shit and disgusting. I do believe, in light of my extreme disgust of the SOB, I significantly toned down the post to where I easily could of put it.
#83. To: Original_Intent (#61)
Either you can continue to live in denial or you can confront reality however harsh it might seem. I much prefer living in reality however grim it may now be. The only way the course can be righted is to first confront reality and see things as they are not as you would wish them to be.
Lord Acton
#84. To: James Deffenbach (#83)
If he is in fact an American citizen he would have had no problem producing a CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. The fact that he hasn't indicates that he is hiding something.
#85. To: Original_Intent (#76)
I think I can sum up the Obama Phenomena in one word: PsyOps.
#86. To: James Deffenbach, Horse, christine (#83)
#87. To: TwentyTwelve (#86)
Obama Crimes.com
Lord Acton
#88. To: James Deffenbach (#87)
Obama Crimes.com
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest