THE NEXT BIG THING (liberal Media Matters hiring intern trolls)

bigjournalism.com ^ | Mar 4 2010 | Andrew Breitbart

[Mamzelle]

Please read about Breitbart's opening salvo against John Podesta and Media Matters.

This is not paranoia. Media Matters, a Soros outfit, is hiring "interns" to come on conservative forums and try to sow division, slow down momentum, forment confusion. And they are better at it than they used to be. They don't curse and swear like liberals on their own forums do.

[BP2]

That's what you're gonna have to get the Supreme Court to decide, in the end...

The problem is that the disrupters believe (or at least attempt to get everyone one else to believe) that it's a foregone conclusion that Obama’s “Natural Born Citizen” status is assured. As a “Constitutional scholar,” Obama was well aware of this Constitutional “loophole” and he exploited it with a little help from his friends in Congress.

I can tell you after hundreds of hours of serious scholarship study on the topic of “Natural Born Citizen” — from extensive case law review, to dozens of journal papers, to Congressional Bills and hearings — as applied to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, it's far from assured that Barrack Hussein Obama is a “Natural Born Citizen”.

Further, when you factor in the dubious circumstances and Chain of Custody surrounding Obama's FactCheck COLB, and that it's never appeared in Court to be accepted as prima facie FACT by a Judge, Obama deserves even more suspicion and scrutiny — especially considering how it's ACCEPTED that he swims in a sea of LIES. Both Liberals and Conservatives doubt Obama's personal Truthfulness — that's very telling! Obama's Credibility gap obviously extends to what he said and did BEFORE the Inauguration.

Just as you rightfully acknowledge, this is a 220-plus year unresolved enigma that only the SCOTUS or a Constitutional Amendment can resolve.

But the historical references used by our Framers give us the answers.

Pick whichever you want to use — either hurts Obama's Eligibility:

BLACKSTONE:

or VATTEL:

[humblegunner]

Trolls don't have to be smited ... they choose to be.

So, by having an opinion differing from yours, I'm a troll?

Really?

OK, here you go. My neck is on the block.

Smite me if you can.

Smite away, O mighty smiter!

[Uncle Chip]

Bottom line... just "get the court case" going that is solid... and follow it... and that's all that anyone has to do, simply report on the progress of the court case.

So then we birthers are doing the right thing by pressing this issue and educating the people and pushing this issue forward. Isn't that right???

It's the law of the land, except when two opposing legal sides have different takes on what it says... :-)

So then the Bible is the Word of God, except when two opposing sides have different takes on what it says???

[BP2]

Aw, does your kitty hurt, pussy-cat?
Are we cramping your After-Birther troll style? Waaaaa

We all reap what we sow.

That goes doubly for derisive trolls not invited to the conversation.

[Star Traveler]

Here... let me help you out here... I'll give you the links to those posts... and that way people can click to it and see what was said...

It's so much easier that way, doncha know... :-)

• Post #219
• Post #222
• Post #223
• Post #228
• Post #235
• Post #261

As if someone can't go back up and look at anyone's posts ... LOL ...

[little jeremiah]

You never answered my questions.

What churches teach/preach “hate”? Other than the leftist street theater Westboro “Church”?

Why won’t you answer my questions? I asked politely.

[BP2]

Smite me if you can. Smite away, O mighty smiter!

Eh ... some are worth the trouble. Others aren't worthy ...

[parsifal]

But you see, what concerns me now is that Obama has caused all this Constitutional Crisis in the first place. If he had just coughed up the info right from the get go, you would never had to spend all this time researching this.

Now don’t get me wrong. I think his NBC status is a slam dunk. And that’s not because any of your research is wrong. per se, but that you started in the wrong place. You should have started in the WONG place as a matter of how one approaches this.

But that being said, the only reason why the question got to going in the first place was the doubts about where he was born. And you do think it was Kenya, don’t you? I mean you don’t think he was born in Hawaii do you? if Obama had dome the right thing in the first place,we wouldn’t be having this discussion, would we?

parsy, who blames Obama

[thackney]

If we were discussing cooking or cats, it would be different. Not very emotionally charged topics.

I first read that to be:

If we were discussing cooking of cats,

That would be different. A very emotionally charged topics.

[parsifal]

FWIW, I think there is a whole lot of “hate” in some churches, as there has always been. For example, as is said, prior to the Lord’s Prayer, the Pharisees were full of themselves, and their prayers were about themselves. And the woman taken in adultery. The “church” answer was to stone her, and Jesus, while not condoning the sin, was very forgiving toward the sinner. Had this not been a unique approach, I suspect we never would have heard of it.

parsy

[Star Traveler]

You were asking ...

So then we birthers are doing the right thing by pressing this issue and educating the people and pushing this issue forward. Isn't that right???

Not on Part 1 of the above that I was talking about. That's because there's a loophole in that no candidate is legally required to produce their birth certificate, which is why the state law is needed to require any candidate to produce a birth certificate or else they cannot be on the ballot.

That was the primary push of the birth certificate issue in the beginning and not with the natural born status issue (part 2 above). And thus, as I've said from the beginning, you don't go to court to get the court to have a candidate produce a birth certificate when that candidate is not required by law to produce one in the first place.

What you do is get the law on the books. So, no..., in that regard, all those who were pursuing those cases were wrong... and the courts have shown that they were wrong. The state law is required and I hope that these FReepers start working for those state laws.

In regards to the Part 2 of the overall birther issue, gradually, over a long period of time, more and more are shifting over to that as their main issue, but it wasn't that way in the beginning and that wasn't the thrust of all those court cases that we've had in the past. Those are all about the birth certificate issue (and it being produced; you need the state law for that...).

So, I didn't see cases being pursued in terms of the natural born status issue. And that still remains to be seen if anyone can get a case put forward with this issue (not producing the birth certificate, mind you..., but just on the basis of what Obama has said about his parents and the citizenship issue).

If someone is following a case on that issue alone, I would like to see it. I personally have not followed any court case on the natural born status issue, because I know how long they take to wind their way through court, so I just wait until one "hits the news" and it is proceeding to the Supreme Court -- and then I'll start watching it. Otherwise... it's just a "wait and see" game right now.

So, no... the birthers were doing the wrong thing on the birth certificate issue with the court cases. That was going nowhere and I could see that in the beginning. We needed a state law on that one, not a court case.

But, if anyone is pursuing the natural born status issue, in regards to Obama, that's the only one that has any chance of going anywhere, but not anytime soon, unfortunately. And there's no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take it, anyway.

You only need one case like that to proceed and then you just wait and see what happens... nothing much more to do than that.

[little jeremiah]

Sheesh, MHG - a ST fan club! Who would’ve thunk it! shocked/not that lm supports a fellow whateveritis.

[little jeremiah]

This is insane.

[BP2]

But that being said, the only reason why the question got to going in the first place was the doubts about where he was born.

Hmmm, sounds like YOU don't trust Obama either, Parsy.

Care to take the survey yet?

Please rate the integrity & honesty surrounding the
Chain of Custody of Obama's "birth certificate."

Answer the following honestly ("1" is LOW, "10" is HIGH):

Rate the integrity & honesty of Barack Hussein Obama?

Rate the integrity & honesty of Obama's
2008 Chicago Campaign office?

Rate the non-partisanship of FactCheck.org
in "evaluating" Obama's COLB?

Rate the integrity & honesty of Nancy Pelosi and the DNC?

[Las Vegas Ron]

Thanks for making my point, you're right, notheing new.

Love the ridicule, try it on Jim Rob sometime and see what happens.

[Vigilanteman]

You are the one that first brings up Romney in YOUR post #413 in this thread. Plus you can't tell the difference between Jim Robinson's post which you quote and which is based on political differences and your rants which are motivated by religious bigotry, among other things which I don't pretend to understand because I can't see into your mind.

And you're the one who tries to twist my words into an anti-protestant rant when I am targeting only a small band of loud, noisy fundies who wear their bigotry on their sleeves for all of us to see. Most fundamentalists and Protestants are embarassed by them and disown them, much as true conservatives disown the rantings which appear on stormfront.org. But you, apparently, either cannot tell the difference or choose not to for whatever reasons. Therefore, have the last word because I will not reply further on this thread.

[DJ MacWoW]

Yup.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Distraction from the content, another one of your tactics.

You've been pwn3d

[little jeremiah]

Never answering my honest questions about which churches teach/preach “Hate”, what kind of “hate” you mean - when people “hate” it is directed towards someone/s - who are these many churches “hating”?

And trotting out Westboro “Church” as as an example of “church and hate” is nothing other than a typical leftist/”gay” agenda slogan, along with your tagline, about which you claim innocence.

Which just happens to be a very famous slogan of the “gay” rights agenda pushers.

You have not answered any of my questions, so the suspicion is on you.

[Star Traveler]

You were asking ...

So then the Bible is the Word of God, except when two opposing sides have different takes on what it says???

It happens the same way with the Bible, too... in case you haven't noticed -- and right here on Free Republic, too.

Just like the Constitution is the law of the land, but opposing legal sides take a different view on the meaning of what it says... it happens the same way with the Bible.

The Bible is the Word of God (just like I've always said, too) and there are opposing sides (and you see them here) who take the meaning of those very same words -- in a different way.

[Of course, for the sake of accuracy, I'll also note that there are those who disagree that it's the Word of God and inerrant and infallible in all that it says. I just should note that...]

So, those who take the Bible as the Word of God, inerrant and infallible in all that it says -- still disagree with the meaning of what it says. If you've ever been in the religion threads, you would know that... LOL...

Thus, in regards to the Bible and what it means, we'll also have to wait for the "judge's decision" on that one, too -- to "settle it" between the "opposing sides"... :-)

That judge will be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, when He sends His Son to earth, the Messiah of Israel, to put into force his one-world government over all the nations of the world -- that's when we'll "get a decision" on some of those disputes... :-)