Both of these guys are idiots.
1) William - Good exposure of the facts
2) “DICK” - the name says it all
“If a right winger cant blubber on and on about how theyre being victimized, then theyve got no defense.”
D.E. (whoever it is) is a perfect example of the left “projecting” their beliefs and M.O. onto others.
Everyone KNOWS the left (progressives) are the ones crying victimization at the bat of an eyelash.
I think they’re scared...as well they SHOULD be.
Where do they contribute, the sperm bank, red cross?They haven't contributed much here.
DE: Typical liberal tactics. If you can’t win on the facts, distort, diffuse and resort to foul mouth name calling.
It’s real simple. Produce the document.. End of story.. There is no debate.
Ellis, typical liberal, has no defense so he starts out by calling people names and attempting to use sarcasm.
It’s all a big game of Liar’s Dice, and the American People have called “BS” on the hand claimed...
But nobody will lift up the cup to see who has won.
“innocent until proven guilty”? No. Sorry. You run for POTUS you demonstrate to the American people you hold the qualifications for office listed in the Constitution.
Trump’s little display made it clear to even the MSM: a “certificate of live birth” is NOT a birth certificate.
Why the $2 million in legal expense to fight the American public from seeing a document it costs $39 bucks to obtain?
The best information about Chester A Arthur was that he was frequently a liar and worked hard to hide information. The facts were not found by the press of the day and many were distracted by claims he was really born in Canada.
I hadn't run across Charles Evans Hughes Sr at the time. I have read one site that suggests he was, without doubt, not qualified under jus sanguinis and that a Democrat, FDR's future Secretary of State Breckenridge Long, brought the issue forward at the time. Maybe Hughes was qualified, maybe he was not. It's less important since he was not elected president BUT that is was an issue then, makes it a legitimate issue now.
Neither answers the question of Obama's qualification or address his flippant unwillingness to release his long for birth certificate. I realize his action is purposeful, designed as a red herring and allow him to mock opponents.
It's a scandal the courts, the congress and state legislatures (via eligibility bills) have been unwilling to look at this issue. It's evident there is, as Al Gore once infamously said, "no controlling legal authority."
How is a certified copy of a birth certificate required for a driver's license or state ID card but, apparently, not to become POTUS? What are these legislators really afraid of? Even bills that would bypass the 2012 election, and therefore questions about Obama, are failing.
It’s a shame the “argument” most frequently presented is, “Oh all that’s been settled. Move on.”
Trump as recently as yesterday was called out by leftist media (Time, etc.) for even thinking of running for president showing only his Certificate of Live Birth — and that’s all we’ve ever seen from Obama.
But in the same articles those JounaLists suggest the Obama issue has been settled.
When? He’s never shown it. Lawsuits are pending. Nobody has standing, the courts have said delaying it, and we have a fraud as POTUS.
God bless Donald Trump! Never thought I’d say that..
The writer of the above sentence lacks education or intelligence. He or she should be talking about anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
With the exception of the first writer, I was not impressed with the statements and comments on the "birther" issue. Generally there is a lack of common sense and too many unsupported assertions about the people with unanswered questions.
Such a dearth of knowledge about a sitting president is unprecedented!
There are lack of information and access to Mr. Obama's writings, his 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, selective service registration records, social security number irregularities, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and adoption records.
This information lockout continues in his "transparent" presidency, with organization after organization having to sue under the FOI Act to get basic information about meetings, attendees, motives of people elected and appointed to govern us.
Question 5) How do you predict that the birth certificate topic will end?
Bammy and Co. have had plenty of time to cook up a good-enough forgery. If he is ever actually forced to show something, that’s what he’ll show. And most of the people, most of the time, will believe him.
The saying goes,” If the facts are against you, attack the law. If the law is against you, attack the facts. If the facts and the law are against you, attack the prosecutor.” Dick Ellis seems to be using a variation of this, not to mention he is also an off his rocker, mad dog, crazy, liberal, Obamanoid.
If I just want to stay with the facts #1 is an out right winner.
This is legit? I ask because Dick Ellis (DE) is frothing at the potty mouth through-out it, so much so to be considered a over-the-top satire of the anti-birther opinions which are in fact almost completely name-calling.
I just retired after 22 years in the military. I’ve had to provide my BC numerous times. I plan on going to school so I filled out the FAFSA. I got a notice yesterday that I need to provide a copy of my BC to verify my citizenship! I also had to give the original as proof when I applied for my passport.
In short, this article reflects the MSM and RINO approach to the issue - dance around the sidelines and never ever cut to the core issue.
IMHO, I think everyone on Obama’s side of the issue have realize, some from the very beginning, that the 44th President of the United States of America can well be the last President under the 1787 Constitution. He could also be the last Democratic Party President.
American has always sough a level playing field and prided ourselves in being a nation of laws. When (If?) this core value gets violated the resulting backlash will be disastrous for those who aided and abetted such an act.
We are, perhaps, seeing a massive conspiracy destined to keep the current elite in their bastions of power. A careful reading of world history from the 20th Century shows that their reaction to a crises has been unsuccessfully repeated on almost every content. Who says The US is exempt from this force?