Fits.
Posted on 01/13/2011 10:16:28 AM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
CBS News allowed the following comment to be published on its website, following an article about Obama’s visit to Arizona yesterday:
... Who were the doctor(s) and nurse(s) at Kapi`Olani that delivered Barack? My ex-wife worked at the hospital and I understand the records at Kapi’Olani are impeccable. Where are the foot prints? What public records exist that can even demonstrate that Mrs. Obama was even at Kapi’Olani on the day of Barack’s birth? Talk at Kapi`Olani, would have been unabashed, the city of Honolulu at the time very racist towards black people.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Sorry, no.
Damn you're an idiot troll. I don't follow I lead.
You may have already seen this. I posted it on another thread. It’s a little long, but it makes a point. All the Obots can do when they read it is stammer about the 14th amendment. They seem to hate the US as much as Obama, but are slightly better at hiding the fact.
Hypothetical:
You are a Founder, and your desire is to protect this country which you love, and which you know will be threatened by subversive forces. You write in the NBC requirement, and in your mind this is to rule out certain non-American, un-American or even anti-American (Manchurian) candidates from winning an election and fundamentally threatening the Republic from within.
Fast forward. Theoretically speaking, posit this scenario. Karl Marx, although already married, makes a legal visit to the US and ‘marries’ a 17 yo black girl [or so we are told; we are never shown the marriage license]. While the child is young, the mother divorces this man, moves to a foreign country and has her son adopted by a foreign national. The parents hate free market capitalism, and indoctrinate their son into the superiority of foreign cultures.
When eventually the son returns, he’s turned over to communists. They rear him with a virulent hatred for whites and traditional American values. When he gets to college he makes no secret of his affiliations: he selects radical Marxists and the most radical of all brands of feminists as friends, since these are the only people he feels comfortable with. Later he writes a book and dedicates it to the dreams he received from his father, Marx. This father supported the taking of 100 % of the citizens money by the state, and doling it out as the State sees fit. The son knows this, and writes a paean to his father’s ‘dreams’ because he shares them, and wants the world to know he shares them. He writes a second book in which he unabashedly offers his view of whites: “White men’s greed runs a world in need”.
Now he runs for POTUS. We have come to a time in our nation’s history when asking any kind of question whatsoever of a biracial man is considered racist, so he gets a complete pass during the election. When asked to show his original long form BC, he spits in our faces. (The evil whites have no right to question their biracial Marxist Messiah!) He rules in the kind of luxury and opulence enjoyed by tinpot dictators, and his executive orders further the impression that he’s not a president but a king. He runs the US down all over the world, apologizing for us in humiliating and demeaning ways while praising countries with wretched human rights records. He nationalizes banks, car companies, healthcare, etc. He subverts our interests to those of the UN. He pushes for, and gets, a treaty favorable to Russia and unfavorable to us. He seeks to destroy out military by homosexualizing/sodomizing it. There’s much more, but you get the picture.
Now as a Founder, can you honestly say that this isn’t precisely what you were trying to guard us from, with the NBC requirement? You wanted to assure that a US born and bred person, who knew and respected our culture, values, history and traditions, held the highest office in the land. Is not Obama EXACTLY the person the Founders feared, and tried to exclude? He is fast destroying the country they loved and sacrificed for. And it’s not a coincidence. He is not a NBC; he doesn’t understand us yet he hates us rabidly. And if the Constitution had been respected and honored, he would never have attained the sinecure from which to do his filthy work.
The alternative is that as a Founder, you wrote the NBC requirement precisely SO that a man like Marx, Mao, Hitler, Stalin—or worse—could sire a future POTUS, so long as he ‘married’ an underage American girl in order to do so. If you can’t see the idiocy in that, then you are a Leftist Loon no matter what you say.
Fits.
The scientist beats the 2-bit lawyer every time by simply closing his/her escape routes.
You obviously can’t answer a direct question and you picked on Rule 17 that only existed in my mind to get out from the corner I scientifically put you in!
What a liberal 2-bit lawyer!
You took the second alternative by NOT answering, so, since you boogied, put your boogle in your pipe and smoke it! Don’t worry about exploding, fire won’t detonate TNT, only a fuse will. You can smoke your boogle to your heart desire!
FReepers, any of these trolls (lawyers) HAS to answer the question I posted TriNitroToluene in #638. If not, they’ve no hoof to stand on.
Now, go away and don’t let Laz hit ya where the Good Lord split ya!!
Looks like you are leading the birthers, Right off the cliff. lol
The worst part is that the usual suspects said it didn't matter, I wish I were joking but I'm not....I hear ya loud and clear FRiend.
(I'll consider it an achievment when my *cubs* are successful.)
Cheers!
Well at least when they say it doesn’t matter, they make two things clear. One, they don’t understand the Constitution, and two, they’re flaming liberals.
Since you are an obamao supporter, why don't you tell us where he is leading us and why you support and defend his illegitimate presidency?
You really are ignorant of the law. We were discussing Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. There is a Rule 17. It has to do with Real Parties in Interest and Capacity to Sue. It is obvious from your posts that you do not have the capacity to carry on a normal conversation without resorting to outright lies.
‘Now that our son has won, we can look forward to better roads, improved health and educational facilities since we know he can provide us all that.’
Kevin J. Kelley, ‘Joy as Obama romps home’, Daily Nation Online, 4 November 2004.
http://afraf.oxfordjournals.org/content/108/431/197.full#fn-72
He’s been a busy lttle guy this afternoon.
Actually i enjoy the internet while I have the football games on.
Under the applicable Constitutional provision, the case law and statutory law there is is no question that Obama is a NBC.
Wrong.
1) The “grandfather clause” placed into the Constitution for qualifying for the presidency was due to the fact that a lot of the founding fathers of the Constitution were born as British subjects. Just like Obama (see post 534). Even Factcheck.org confirs this. The only problem for Obama, he was not born when the Consitution was ratified (but he does use a SSN from a person purported to have been born in 1890).
2) Why else was Obama and his minions before the election attempting to change the meaning of NBC through legislation?
(a)”Why Did Sen. James Inhofe Propose an End-Run Around the Constitutional Eligibility Requirement for President?”
(b) What was the real motive behind the “mean-mothing” Senate Resolution 511 which did not even reach the House of Representatives for review and debate?
http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility/DemocraticTwoStep.html
So the battle ground shifts to the courts with a variety of lawsuits. And like with McCain, the use of “standing” and “no proof of direct injury” are used to dismiss cases from even being heard on the merits.
Apparently you didn’t completely read the story I linked to “Pending Obamacare lawsuit alleges healthcare-reform bill is unconstitutional on 15 separate counts including Obama’s eligibility.”
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/01/pending-obamacare-lawsuit-alleges.html
Excerpt:
“...reminded this Examiner that the government has hinted three times that they would produce a motion-to-dismiss and demonstrate that each of those fifteen counts was without merit.”
So the annointed one cannot respond to just 14 of the counts can he? What is he waiting for, accelerated aging of his birth documents that he has a sudden and renewed interest in revealing for public scrutiny?
Another point...from what I can obtain in my limited time researching there were 2 prior instances when people who were not qualified for office managed to attain their positions, Chester Arthur as President and Spiro Agnew as VP. Because no one challenged their eligibility successfully either due to lack of insight or for any other reason, this does not justify usurpation of the highest office in the land against the will and foresight of the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution.
By your own admission with these previous instances you have confirmed that Obama is illegally in office. Thank you.
The ‘Son of Kogelo’ is at the moment addressing the Muslim World in Egypt.
You are just plain ignorant or an Obama shill. The law despite your contention is not certain either way. As a liberal, your type tries to sway the meaning of the law to your agenda and you call it "living Constitution". So we all deserve an answer from the SCOTUS, neither you and your matchbooks school of law and shoe repair education or the best, most experienced Constitutional Attorney in the US can make a definitive statement as to what the SCOTUS would determine. Would a court with a majority of conservatives rule differently than one with a majority of liberals? Does that change the law or just the interpretation of the law?
You can make an informed guess, but no one knows which way the wind will blow when the time comes.
So would you bet all you own and all own and will own for the rest of your life (I was going to say your life but that might be misconstrued)on the outcome of the SCOTUS? Are you that sure?
Your fuse is burning and you are getting close to blowing yourself up.
I’m a scientist not a lawyer. Your negative IQ almost beats 0b0z0’s!
You’re trapped in your own web of lies and you ain’t Spiderman!
What lies, troll? You obviously are now trapped as the RAT you are!
I’m following Papa Alinsky to the letter, something you can’t handle and force you to resort to personal attacks.
How un-PC can you get?
TSK...TSK...TSK...Don’t lose your nerve and show that Papa Alinsky, moi, will beat an Alinsky wannabe, toi, anytime!
Papa Alinsky, Woo Hoo!
Hello POS. Those State Department standards are not good enough to get on any state presidential ballot eligibility. If the COLB does not show where the candidate was born, as in the hospital, or it does not show who are the candidate's parents. Those COLBs accepted by the State Department should not be good enough. It is you who wants Obama to skate by with some BS COLB. I even doubt that Obama will show anything in 2012 since it will opened the door to having all his birth records reviewed if he shows some BS COLB. The state and the public will have the right to check out the underlying documents and that is a long form birth certificate. His privacy on the issue will have gone out the window. You lose again Obot.
Way don’t you admit there is a Rule 17 and that you lied about it. Good Bye
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.